THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
Technip Energies India Ltd. [Formerly Technip India Limited], through its authorized representative, Prashant Sharma, S/o. Brij Mohan Sharma - Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India through Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas and Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 96 Of 2023
Decided On : 27-06-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Decision-making process adopted by Tendering Authority - Rejection of Price Bid - Judicial review - Aggrieved by rejection of its Bid, petitioner approached Court seeking setting aside of decision of respondent authorities to reject Bid of petitioner and also for a direction to respondent to consider Price Bid of petitioner in accordance with NIT and Bidding Documents – Court has not been able to find any element of arbitrariness, irrationality or unreasonableness in decision-making process - Para 28.
Finding of the Court:
Decision-making process adopted by Tendering Authority leading to decision of rejection of Price Bid of petitioner has been examined, Court has not been able to find any element of arbitrariness, irrationality or unreasonableness in decision-making process - Power of judicial review is to be exercised to prevent any kind of arbitrariness, irrationality or unreasonableness and its purpose is to check whether decision is made lawfully and not check whether decision is sound - Court is of unhesitant view that process followed by Tendering Authority right from stage of opening of Price Bids at which Price Bid of petitioner stood invalidated for reasons solely attributable to petitioner only, till decision of giving information to petitioner that its Price Bid could not be considered for further evaluation due to its non-viewability without login credentials has been found to be a fair and transparent one - Court is of considered view that there is no infirmity in decision-making process as well as in decision to reject Price Bid of petitioner.
Result: Petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
By a Notice Inviting Tender [NIT] bearing no. TK-1P25A-MP-RFQ-0034 dated 25.10.2022, the respondent no. 3, M/s Tyssenkrupp Industrial Solutions [India] Private Limited as the Engineering Procurement & Construction Management [EPCM] Consultant on behalf of the respondent no. 2, that is, M/s Numaligarh Refinery Limited [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tendering Authority’ or ‘Tendering Authority’ or ‘the NRL’, at places, for the sake of easy reference] invited e-Bids from eligible bidders through the website : http://eprocure.gov.in/eprocure/app for execution of a contract-work :- ‘Supply of Reactor & Regenerator [RXRG] Package for PFCC Unit as per Technical Specifications for Numaligarh Refinery Limited, Assam, India’ [‘the Contract-Work’, for short]. As per the NIT, the competitive bidding process was on Open Global Tender basis under single stage two-bid system [Part–1 : Techno-Commercial Bid (Unpriced Bid) and Part–2 : Price Bid] from competent bidders with sound technical and financial capabilities fulfilling the Bidder Qualification Criteria [BQC], as stated in the Bidding Documents. As per the NIT, the time schedule for completion of the Contract-Work is thirty-two [32] months [thirty (30) months for Mechanical Completion including Pre-Commissioning and two (02) months for Commissioning] from the date of issue of the Letter of Acceptance [LoA]. Originally, the start date of submission of bid was 24.11.2022 and the last date of submission of bid was up-to 15-00 hours, 30.11.2022. During the course of the bidding process, the time-line for submission of bids was re-scheduled and the last date of submission of bid was extended up-to 07.12.2022.
2. The Bidding Documents had mentioned the Bidder Qualification Criteria [BQC] including technical experience criteria, financial experience criteria and commercial experience criteria. As regards the mode of submission, the NIT mentioned that the Bids were to be uploaded on the e-Procurement Portal : http://eprocure.gov.in/eprocure/app [also to be referred to as ‘the Portal’ or ‘e-Procurement Portal’ at places hereinafter, for easy reference] before the last date and time of submission of bids [Bid Due Date] and a bid submitted using any other mode was not to be accepted. It was further notified that the bids including supporting documents, were to be uploaded by the bidders only through the e-Procurement Portal and hardcopy of the Bidding Documents was not to be accepted. The bidders had to fill in all relevant information and to submit the Bidding Documents in complete into electronic tender on the e-Procurement Portal. Both the Techno-Commercial Bid and the Price Bid were to be submitted concurrently by signing them digitally, at the e-Procurement Portal. As per the procedure laid down in the Bidding Documents, the Techno-Commercial Bids [Part-I] received on the e-Procurement Portal were to be opened first and thereafter, the same, submitted in electronic form, were to be processed on the e-Procurement Module on the e-Procurement Portal. The Price Bids [Part-II] of e-Bid of only those bidders whose Techno-Commercial Bids were determined to be technically and commercially acceptable by the EPCM Consultant, would be opened. The bidders selected for opening of their Price Bids were to be informed about the date, time and place of Price Bid opening.
3. After opening the Techno-Commercial Bids, the Techno-Commercial Bids of the bidders were evaluated and completed on 24.12.2022. After evaluation of the Techno-Commercial Bids, the respondent NRL/EPCM Consultant found Techno-Commercial Bids of two bidders i.e. the petitioner and the respondent no. 4 responsive and it was decided to open the Price Bids submitted by the two participant bidders. The date of opening of the Price Bids was scheduled at 3-00 p.m. on 26.12.2022.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that it successfully uploaded both the Techno-Commercial Bid and the Price Bid on the e-Procurement Portal on 07.12.2022. By
Poddar Steel Corporation vs. Ganesh Engineering Works and others
Jagdish Mandal vs. State of Orissa and others
Tata Cellular vs. Union of India
Khare and Tarkunde Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and others
Agrawal Roadlines Pvt. Ltd. vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd and others
Fasih Chaudhary vs. Director General, Doordarshan and others
Montecarlo Limited vs. National Thermal Power Corporation Limited
Agmatel India Private Limited vs. Resoursys Telecom and others
N.G. Projects Limited vs. Vinod Kumar Jain and others
G.J. Fernandez vs. State of Karnataka
Tata Cellular vs. Union of India
Raunaq International Limited vs. I.V.R. Construction Limited and others
Jagdish Mandal vs. State of Orissa and others
Meerut Development Authority vs. Assistant Management Studies
Afcons Infrastructure Limited vs. Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation Limited & another
Central Coalfields Limited vs. SLL-SML (Joint Venture Consortium)
Silppi Constructions Contractors vs. Union of India and another
Bharat Coking Coal Limited and others vs. AMR Dev Prabha and others
Montecarlo Limited vs. National Thermal Power Corporation Limited
Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. v. Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation Ltd.
Shobikaa Impex P Ltd. v. Central Medical Services Society
Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India
Rashmi Metaliks Ltd. and another vs. Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority and others
Power of judicial review can be invoked if approach adopted is found to be arbitrary or mala fide or if procedure adopted is meant to favour one.
The rejection of a bid in a government tender must be in accordance with the tender conditions, and any deviation from the specified format, such as password protection, can lead to justified rejecti....
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 altern....
The court upheld the principle of judicial restraint in administrative action and emphasized the need for the State to act within the bounds of reasonableness in tender matters.
Judicial review of tender processes adheres to principles of reasonableness, emphasizing the authority's discretion in evaluating bids and prioritizing public interest over individual complaints.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.