Strict compliance with essential tender conditions is necessary; courts will not interfere unless there is evidence of arbitrary or irrational decisions.

JUDGMENT

Subramonium Prasad, J.

1. W.P.(C) 13405/2021 has been filed by M/s Grant Thornton Bharat LLP (hereinafter referred to as "Grant Thornton") under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, challenging the communication dated 08.10.2021 by which the financial bid of Grant Thornton was rejected/disqualified by the Financial Evaluation Committee with respect to Tender No.NICSI/eGov Professionals/2020/11 and File No. 10(08)/2020- NICSI for Empanelment of Agencies for Certified e-Governance Professional Services.

2. W.P.(C) 14924/2021 has been filed by PricewaterhouseCoopers Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as "PwC") under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, seeking directions to National Informatics Centre Services Incorporated (NICSI) to empanel PwC in the Tier-1 category for Tender No. NICSI/eGov Professionals/2020/11for Empanelment of Agencies for Certified e-Governance Professional Services.

3. This Court is of the opinion that the decision rendered in W.P.(C) 13405/2021 will have a discernible bearing on the decision that is rendered in W.P.(C) 14924/2021, and W.P.(C) 14924/2021 is to be considered only if W.P.(C) 13405/2021 is decided in favour of the Petitioner in W.P.(C) 13405/2021. Accordingly, W.P.(C) 14924/2021 is being detagged.

4. The facts leading to the instant petitions are stated as under:

a) In January 2021, NICSI floated a "Request for Proposal for Empanelment of Agencies for NICSI Certified e-Governance Professional Services". Thereafter, Corrigendum-XII dated 20.05.2021 was issued as per which the tender document was wholly revised.

b) On 01.09.2021, Grant Thornton submitted its technical bid for empanelment. The technical bid was accepted by the Technical Evaluation Committee, along with those of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP, KPMG Assurance and Consulting Services LLP, Ernst and Young LLP, and PwC. Subsequently, the Detailed Financial Bid was submitted by Grant Thornton and PwC in September 2021.

c) Grant Thornton was declared as the lowest bidder (L-1) and accordingly, the Detailed Financial Bid of Grant Thornton was opened. This Detailed Financial Bid portrays three tables, i.e. Table 1 for Management/Functional Profile for Tier I, Table 2 for Technology Profile for Tier I, and Table 3 for Subject Matter Expert for Tier I. The A, B and C rows in the tables showcase the sum total of the respective tables. However, on finding that there had been a failure to multiply the variable Unit Price mentioned in Table C with the constant figure of 100 and that the bid documents had not been filed in proper format, the bid of Grant Thornton was disqualified.

d) It is stated by Grant Thornton that the Detailed Financial Bid had been submitted in accordance with Annexure-13 of the RFP which remained unchanged despite Corrigendum-XII dated 20.05.2021 being issued that had led to the overhauling of the entire tender document. It is stated that the financial formats available on the website continued to display only the unrevised Annexure-13 of the Detailed Financial Bid.

e) It is stated that on opening of the Detailed Financial Bid of Grant Thornton, a letter dated 27.09.2021 was immediately issued by Grant Thornton to NICSI stating that though an arithmetical error had been committed, the unit rate's weightage in the calculation of the Gross Total Value (GTV) was only 1%, and therefore, the difference in the GTV quoted and the GTV that should have been ideally arrived at was minor and would not impact the L1 position of Grant Thornton. The letter referred to Clause 9.2 (l) of the revised tender document which states as follows:

"9.2 FINANCIAL EVALUATION