SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Guj) 582

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.B. PARDIWALA, VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, JJ.
Montecarlo Limited & 1 Others - Petitioners
Versus
Gujarat Rail Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (G-RIDE) - Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 6767 of 2021
Decided On : 22-07-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mr. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Parth Contractor.
For the Respondent: Mr. Gursharan H. Virk for Mr. Vivek V. Bhamare, Mr. Jay Savla for Mr. Harmish K. Shah.

Point of Law: District Collector is not empowered to consider the aspect of alteration of any route or alignment except to remove difficulties faced by the licensee. As a result of this, even the request of alternative route of the petitioner not dealt with, in the considered opinion of this Court, is insignificant as the District Collector is not empowered to suggest any alteration as same is within the exclusive domain of the experts. Hence, simply because the alternative route contention is not dealt with, which has direct bearing upon less minimum damage concept, the order is not possible to be assailed by the petitioner.

Headnote:

Companies Act, 1956 - Business of infrastructure - Company incorporate - Writ-applicant no.1 is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act company is engaged in the business of infrastructure, construction and development with operations diversified across highways railways buildings and factories mining energy infrastructure and water & irrigation verticals of the infrastructure sector - Writ-applicant is one of Directors of company

Finding of the Court : Strenuously urged before us by senior counsel appearing for the writ-applicant that the mistake committed by the writ-applicant could be termed as unintentional and if that be so then writ-applicant being lowest bidder should be considered for awarding the contract - Supreme Court in W.B. State Electricity Board vs. Patel Engineering - Mistakes/errors in question it is stated are unintentional and occurred due to fault of computer termed as a repetitive systematic computer typographical transmission failure - Difficult to accept this contention - Mistake may be unilateral or mutual but it is always unintentional - Intentional it ceases to be mistake - Here mistakes may be unintentional but it was not beyond the control of respondent to correct the same before submission of bid

Result: Order accordingly

JUDGMENT :

J.B. Pardiwala, J.

1. By this writ-application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ-applicant, a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, has prayed for the following reliefs :

    “A. That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to admit and allow the present petition;

B. That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to declare the action of the respondent of disqualifying the petitioner no.1 from the bidding process in relation to the Tender Notice No.RIDE/BRCL/EPC/2020-21/002 dated 16.01.2021 issued by the respondent for the “Gauge Conversion of Becharaji (63.83 KM) - Ranuj (101.983 KM) Section, Total length of 38.153 KM Metre Gauge to Broad Gauge with 25 KV AC Electrification in Ahmedabad Division of Western Railway” as being arbitrary, illegal and unjust;

C. that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction to the respondent to consider the bid submitted by the petitioner no.1 in relation to the Tender Notice No.RIDE/BRCL/EPC/2020-21/002 dated 16.01.2021 issued by the respondent for the “Gauge Conversion of Becharaji (63.83 KM) - Ranuj (101.983 KM) Section, Total length of 38.153 KM Metre Gauge to Broad Gauge with 25 KV AC Electrification in Ahmedabad Division of Western Railway”;

D. That pending the hearing and adjudication of the present petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent not to proceed further in relation to the Tender Notice No.RIDE/BRCL/EPC/2020-21/002 dated 16.01.2021 issued by the respondent for the “Gauge Conversion of Becharaji (63.83 KM) - Ranuj (101.983 KM) Section, Total length of 38.153 KM Metre Gauge to Broad Gauge with 25 KV AC Electrification in Ahmedabad Division of Western Railway”;

E. For Ex-parte interim and ad-interim reliefs in terms of prayer (D) above;

F. For such other and further reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

2. The facts giving rise to this writ-application may be summarised as under :

3. The writ-applicant no.1 is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. The company is engaged in the business of infrastructure, construction and development with operations diversified across the highways, railways, buildings and factories, mining, energy infrastructure and water & irrigation verticals of the infrastructure sector. The writ-applicant no.2 is one of the Directors of the company.

4. The respondent no.1 is a joint venture of the Government of Gujarat and the Ministry of Railways. The respondent no.2 is the company in whose favour the contract has been awarded.

5. It appears from the materials on record that the respondent no.1 issued a tender notice dated 16th January 2021, calling for the bids from the interested bidders for the “Gauge Conversion of Becharaji (63.83 KM) - Ranuj (101.983 KM) Section, total length of 38.153 KM Meter Gauge to Broad Gauge with 25 KV AC Electrification in the Ahmedabad Division of the Western Railway”. The timelines in relation to the bids, as prescribed by the respondent, were as under :

    - Bid Due Date (Online) – 06.03.2021 upto 1800 hours.

- Bid Due Date (Physical) – 09.03.2021 upto 1200 hours.

- Bid Opening Date (Technical) – 09.03.2021 upto 1230 hours.

6. The writ-applicant no.1 submitted its bid in the prescribed form on 6th March 2021 through the online portal, and on 9th March 2021 also through the physical mode. The writ-applicant no.1 submitted the following documents along with the bid :

    i. Demand Draft for Bid Processing Fee.

ii. Bid Security in the form of Bank Guarantee.

iii. Letter comprising the Technical Bid.

iv. Details of the Bidder including MoA and AoA of the petitioner no.1 and copy of PAN Card.

v. Technical Capacity of the Bidder.

vi. Details of Eligible Projects.

vii. Mandatory Experience Certificate.

viii. Detail setting out the Financial Capacity of the Bidder.

ix. Statement of Legal Capacity.

x. Power of Attorney for signing the Bid.

xi. Undertaking to agree and abide by the Term

                          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                          1
                          2
                          3
                          4
                          5
                          6
                          7
                          8
                          9
                          10
                          11
                          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                          supreme today icon
                          logo-black

                          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                          Please visit our Training & Support
                          Center or Contact Us for assistance

                          qr

                          Scan Me!

                          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                          whatsapp-icon Back to top