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

2001 Supreme(Gau) 119

GAUHATI HIGH COURT
H. K. SEMA, Actg. C.J. AND P. G. AGARAL, JJ.
Siddharta Kalita, and others -Appellant
Versus
State of Assam, and others -Respondent
Writ Appeal No. 136 of 1998
Decided On : 01-05-2001

The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of transparency and adherence to prescribed rules for wide publication and sufficient time for submission of tenders as mandated by Rule 254 of the Assam Financial Rules.

Headnote:

TENDER NOTICE - Repairing and Improvement of Kamalpur Morrowa Road - Rule 254 of the Assam Financial Rules - The court discussed the requirement of transparency in issuing tenders as mandated by Rule 254 of the Assam Financial Rules. It emphasized the need for wide publication of tender notices and sufficient time for submission of tenders to attract more participants. The court found that the tender notice in this case was not published in accordance with the rules, lacked wide circulation, and had a short submission time, leading to a lack of transparency and limited participation.

Fact of the Case:

The dispute related to the repairing and improvement of Kamalpur Morrowa Road under the Chief Engineer, PWD. The appellant raised a grievance that the tender was not issued in accordance with Rule 254 of the Assam Financial Rules, 1954.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the tender notice lacked transparency and did not adhere to the prescribed rules for wide publication and sufficient time for submission of tenders. Despite this finding, the court decided not to interfere with the work order issued in favor of the respondents due to the progress of work and potential delay in completing the public road repairs.

Issues: The main issue was the lack of transparency in issuing the tender notice and the adherence to the prescribed rules for inviting tenders.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision not to interfere with the work order was based on the progress of work, potential delay in completing the public road repairs, and the need to adhere strictly to the procedure prescribed under Rule 254 of the Assam Financial Rules in future tender calls.

Final Decision: The appeal was disposed of with directions for the respondents to adhere strictly to the procedure prescribed under Rule 254 of the Assam Financial Rules in future tender calls.

Judgement

H. K. SEMA, (Actg. C.J.) :- Heard Mr. K.N.Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. D.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the private Respondents and Mr. C. Choudhury, learned Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam.

2. This writ appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 12-4-2001 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.2115/2001.

3. The dispute relates to repairing and improvement of Kamalpur Morrowa Road under the Chief Engineer, PWD. The undisputed fact is that a tender notice was issued on 15-2-2001 and the same was published in the News Front, a daily in its issue dated 4-3-2001. The preliminary work order was issued in favour of the respondents on 19-3-2001 and the formal work orders were issued on 26-3-2001. A grievance has been raised by the writ appellants that the said tender has not been issued in accordance with Rule 254 of the Assam Financial Rules, 1954. The admitted position is that pursuant to the short tender notice there were only 7 tenders and the work in question has been distributed to 5 tenders.

4. At this stage we would like to point out that the fact that only 7 tenders have been received pursuant to the Notice inviting tenders itself shows that the tender notice was short and it could not attract many tenders who are otherwise eligible for submitting tenders. It is a well settled principle of law by now that the purpose of inviting tender is to attract more tenders and to select the best amongst tenders. More the number of tenders better is the opportunity for the respondent to select the best one from amongst many tenders. This can only be done if the tender is published in a paper which is having wide circulation in the State and given sufficient time for submitting the tender. In the instant case, admittedly, pursuant to the short tender notice which we may safely termed it as "table tender", only 7 tenderers had submitted their tenders and amongst the 7 tenderers the work was distributed to 5 tenderers, which would clearly show that the decision making process has not been transparent.

5. This fact has been contested by Mr. D.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents who submits that there were 5 groups of work and in each group 7 tenderers applied. Be that as it may, the fact to which we are concerned in the present appeal is the time limit mentioned in the tender and the manner in which the tender was published.

6. Rule 254 of the Assam Financial Rules mandated that a tender should be invited in the most open and public manner possible.

It reads -

"254. Sealed tenders should invariably be invited in the most open and public manner possible, by advertisement in the Government Gazette or the Press, or by public notice in English and vernacular; tenders should have free access to the contract documents. The notice should state -

(1) The place where, the time when, the contract documents can be seen, and blank forms of tender obtained;

(2) The place where, and the time and date on which, tenders are to be submitted and are to be opened.

(3) The amount of earnest money to accompany the tenders and the amount and nature of the security deposit required in the case of the accepted tender. The earnest money required should either be forwarded with the tender in currency notes or deposited in the treasury, the duplicate copy of the challan being attached to the tender, cheques on banks should not be accepted for this purposes.

(National Savings Certificates standing in the name of the tenderer and duly endorsed in favour of competent authority for acceptance of tender may also be accepted as earnest money)

(4) With whom, or with what authority the acceptance of the tender will rest."

7. Rule 254 of the Rules, clearly provides that there must be transparency in issuing tender. The Rule further shows that a tender must be invariably invited by advertisement in the Government Gazette or by Press or by public notice in English and vernacular. In the instant case the notice inviting tend




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
whatsapp-icon Back to top