ORDER :

Ujjal Bhuyan, J.

1. Heard Mr. B. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. A. Gayan, learned Central Government Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Also heard Mr. P.K. Roy, learned counsel for respondent No. 4.

2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of decision of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in rejecting the technical bid of the petitioner as invalid as well as the letter dt. 24.10.2018 issued by respondent No. 3 informing the petitioner the reasons for rejection of his bid as technically invalid and threatening blacklisting.

3. Case of the petitioner is that a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) was issued on 8.9.2018 by respondent No. 3 inviting online bids for outsourcing of daily wage unskilled workers and garbage lifting vehicles for conservancy related works in the military stations at Dinjan, Panitola, Chabua, Laipuli (Tinsukia), Mohanbari and Ganeshbari. It was mentioned that estimated cost of the tender was Rs. 4,02,44,954.00. The NIT, termed as request for proposal, had several parts. Part I of the request for proposal dealt with general conditions. It was provided that online bid should be submitted in two covers, namely, first cover and second cover. First cover should contain scanned copies of various documents including scanned copy of proof of similar works undertaken, scanned copy of labour licence and scanned copy of income tax return for last 3 years. Second copy should contain filled up bills of quantities. Part IV of request for proposal contained special conditions of contract. Serial No. 1 dealt with licence for contracting labour. As per Clause (1), tenderers were required to obtain a licence from the office of the Labour Commissioner to contract labour under the provisions of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (1970 Act) which was required to be submitted within 90 days of the acceptance of bid. If the contractor is refused a licence or fails to obtain licence within the aforesaid period of 90 days, the contract agreement would automatically stand terminated with the buyer, i.e., the tendering authority in which event the latter will be at liberty to recover losses, if any, from the security deposit and performance guarantee of the contractor. Clause 1 is extracted hereunder:-

"1. The tenderer would be required to obtain a license issued by the Office of Labour Commissioner to contract labour under the provisions of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. The license should be submitted within 90 days of the acceptance of bid. If the contractor is refused a license for any reason whatsoever or fails to obtain the license within the stipulated period, this agreement shall automatically stand terminated and the buyer shall be at liberty to recover losses, if any from the security deposit and performance guarantee of the contractor."

4. Petitioner responded to the aforesaid NIT and submitted his bid. Altogether 7 tenderers had submitted bids including the petitioner. It is stated that tenders were opened on 29.09.2018 and were evaluated. Technical bids of three tenderers including the petitioner were rejected by the Tender Evaluation Board. According to the petitioner, he could come to know that his bid was rejected on the ground that labour licence submitted by him had expired.

5. Petitioner has further stated that he had quoted 4% above the approved rate and his bid was Rs. 23,79,357.00 which was L1. Bid of respondent No. 4 at Rs. 25,13,227.00 was L2. Bid details of tenderers whose tenders were found valid are mentioned in paragraph 15 of the writ petition.

6. Petitioner submitted representation requesting respondent No. 3 to intimate him about the reasons for rejection of his technical bid. Respondent No. 3 vide impugned letter dated 24.10.2018 informed the petitioner the reasons of rejection of its technical bid. Not only that, petitioner was warned to produce certain certificates of past contracts executed by him