IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH AT ITANAGAR BENCH
NELSON SAILO, J.
M/s Capital Enterprises – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Arunachal Pradesh and Others – Respondents
WP (C) Nos. 376, 403 of 2023
Decided On : 25-08-2023
Notice inviting e-tender – Technical bid - Once published on website, tender notice will also become available through system link - It further provides that in exceptional cases, if press publicity is to be given apart from website publicity, written permission shall be obtained from the next higher authority. Para 8
Finding of Court : Initiation of fresh tender at this stage will not be in public interest particularly when Court has come to a finding that there is nothing wrong with process of e-tendering that was undertaken by respondent authorities as per provisions of the CPWD Manual - Case of S.P.N Enterprise (supra) referred to by learned counsels for petitioners is also found to be not applicable to the present case in view of fact that in that case, notice for inviting tender was put up in notice board of office concerned and was not circulated in any form - Similarly, case (supra) referred to by learned counsel for petitioners is also found to be not applicable as it was a case where NIT was published in a newspaper not widely circulated and Court found it to be not acceptable - Facts in present case are otherwise different and said decision is found to be not applicable.
Result : Writ petitions are dismissed
JUDGMENT :
NELSON SAILO, J.
1. Heard Mr. N. Pada, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP (C) No. 376(AP)/2023, Mr. K. Potom, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP (C) No. 403(AP)/2023, Mr. S. Tapin, learned Senior Govt. Advocate for all the official respondents in both the writ petitions and Mr. R.B. Phukan, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 in WP (C) No. 376(AP)/2023. Since the issues involved in both the writ petitions are one and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order.
2. The facts of the case in brief is that a Notice inviting e-tender was floated by the Executive Engineer, Arunachal Pradesh Public Works Department, Pasighat on 22.06.2023 for upgradation of Bakin Pertin General Hospital, Pasighat to 300 bedded hospital in East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh for an estimated cost of Rs. 99.03 Crores. As per the milestone date of the e-tender, the date of publication in the website was 24.06.2023 at 1030 hrs and the period of downloading of bidding documents was from 24.06.2023 (1200 hrs) to 10.07.2023 (1400 hrs). The commencement of online bid submission was from 27.06.2023 (1100 hrs) and the last date of submission of online bid was 10.07.2023 at 1400 hrs. The date, time and venue of pre-bid meeting was 26.06.2023 at 1030 hrs in the PWD Division Office at Pasighat. The physical submission of Earnest Money Deposit (EMD), tender fee, hard copy and technical bid documents and signed copy of SBD was 14.07.2023 at 1030 hrs in PWD Division Office at Pasighat. The date and time of opening the technical bid was 14.07.2023 at 1130 hrs and the date and time of opening of financial bid was to be notified later on for participation of those who qualified in the technical bid only. According to the petitioners, the Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) was not widely circulated by publication in the local newspaper apart from the claim of the respondents that the same was uploaded in the website/web portal. Because of the non-publication of the NIT in the local newspaper, the petitioners were unaware about the same and could not participate. They came to learn about the same only after the last date of submission of the online bid. According to the petitioner in WP (C) No. 403(AP)/2023, the petitioner came to learn about the NIT on 12.07.2023 and immediately wrote to the President, Arunachal Pradesh Registered Contractors Association (AARCA). The petitioner was informed by AARCA that a representation was already submitted by the Association before the authorities concerned. The Director, Medical Education under instructions wrote to the respondent No. 2 to file para-wise reply to the representation/complaint and suspend the tendering process. However, the same was not complied. AARCA ultimately approached this Court by filing WP (C) No. 349(AP)/2023 but the same was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 07.08.2023 after finding AARCA to have no locus-standi to file the writ petition. It is thereafter that both the writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners concerned.
3. Mr. N. Pada, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP (C) No. 376(AP)/2023 submits that as per notification dated 19.08.2020 (Annexure-X), the Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh in super-session of the earlier notifications has notified that in view of Government policy of Vocal for Local and Atma Nirbhar Bharat to encourage local entrepreneurs, the first priority on any procurement of goods and services shall be done locally through normal tender and further that only when items are not available locally through normal tender, procurement shall be done through Government e-Market (GeM). The said notification is with immediate effect. However, the respondent authorities concerned without adhering to the notification dated 19.08.2020 had issued the tender notice through e-tender only and thereby, the same not having the effect of wide publicity and circulation, the petitioners being unaware have been deprived from partici
Air India Ltd. vs. Cochin International Airport Ltd. (2000) 2 SCC 617
Association of Registration Plates vs. Union of India and Others
M.L. Enterprise vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh and Others
Raunaq International Ltd. vs. I.V.R. Construction Ltd. and Others
Ramana Dayaram Shetty vs. International Airport Authority of India and Others
Point of Law : When some defect is found in the decision-making process, court must exercise its discretionary powers under Article 226 with great caution and should exercise it only in furtherance o....
The court emphasized that the process adopted by the authorities should not be intended to favor someone, and there should be no mala fide or public interest affected for the impugned tender to be qu....
The requirement of providing residency proof via EPIC in tender bids is valid, and non-compliance justifies bid rejection.
The petitioner's lack of locus standi due to not fulfilling the technical qualification criteria and gross delay in approaching the court led to the dismissal of the writ petition.
The state has the right to cancel a tender and issue a new one in the interest of public welfare, and bidders do not acquire vested rights until a formal contract is awarded.
Tender authorities must adhere to statutory criteria and act transparently; courts will not interfere unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or malafide conduct is presented.
Strict adherence to contractual terms and conditions is crucial in tender processes, and non-compliance can lead to rejection of the bid.
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.