Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH AT ITANAGAR BENCH
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
Lokam Tamar Anthony S/o Shri Lokam Tachung – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Arunachal Pradesh – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 49 of 2024
Decided On : 13-03-2024
Tender Evaluation - Challenge to Letter of Intent - Arunachal Pradesh Enlistment of Contractors in Works Department Rules, 2008 - [Clause 15 of Notice Inviting Tender (NIT), dated 11.08.2023] - The court discussed the provisions of the Arunachal Pradesh Enlistment of Contractors in Works Department Rules, 2008, and Clause 15 of the Notice Inviting Tender (NIT), dated 11.08.2023, which mandated the evaluation of tender bids by a Board and the issuance of the Letter of Intent (LoI) to the L1 bidder recommended by the Board. The court highlighted the eligibility criteria required for tenderers and the process for evaluating and recommending bidders, emphasizing the importance of following these procedures in awarding contracts.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the issuance of a Letter of Intent (LoI) to the Respondent No. 8 firm, alleging that it was done in an arbitrary manner, ignoring the recommendation made by the Tender Evaluation Board. The petitioner contended that the Respondent No. 8 firm was ineligible and its bid was non-responsive.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had suppressed vital material facts, misleading the court to pass interim directions. The court concluded that the petitioner's suppression of material facts disentitled it from being granted any relief, and dismissed the writ petition. The interim directions were vacated, and the Respondent No. 8 firm was directed to continue with the supply of goods.
Issues: The issues included the challenge to the issuance of the Letter of Intent (LoI) and the eligibility and responsiveness of the Respondent No. 8 firm's bid. Additionally, the court addressed the petitioner's suppression of material facts and its impact on the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the petitioner's suppression of material facts, which disentitled it from relief. The court emphasized the importance of full and fair disclosure of all material facts when invoking the court's jurisdiction.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and there was no order as to costs. The interim directions were vacated, and the Respondent No. 8 firm was directed to continue with the supply of goods.
JUDGMENT :
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
1. Heard Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel, along with Mr. N. Handique, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Pubi Pangu, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 1; Mr. Binter Picha, learned standing counsel, Department of Rural Development, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, appearing on behalf of Respondents No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 and Mr. Dilip Mazumdar, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. Taja Garam, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 8.
2. The challenge in the present proceedings instituted by the petitioner is to a Letter of Intent (LoI), dated 08.01.2024, issued by the Director, Department of Rural Development, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, to the Respondent No. 8 firm, by holding him to be the lowest bidder in pursuance to a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT), dated 11.08.2023.
3. The Notice Inviting Tender (NIT), dated 11.08.2023, was so issued inviting bids from approved and eligible contractor/vendor/ firm of Kurung Kumey District for “Supply and Procurement of Materials under MGNREGA-2023-24, in respect of CD-Block Parsi-Parlo, Kurung Kumey District, Arunachal Pradesh.” The petitioner being eligible, had submitted his bids complete in all respects. Along with the petitioner, 3(three) other firms including the Respondent No. 8 firm had also submitted their respective bids.
4. It is the contention of the petitioner, basing on a RTI reply, dated 25.01.2024, received by him from the Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, Kurung Kumey District, that the Board as constituted by the Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, Koloriang, for evaluation of the bids received in pursuance of the said Notice Inviting Tender (NIT), dated 11.08.2023, had recommended the petitioner firm as the lowest bidder. The bid of Respondent No. 8 firm was found to be non-responsive for the grounds as assigned in the recommendation of the said Board, dated 30.11.2023. The recommendations of the said Board along with the bids as received by the Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, Koloriang, was thereafter forwarded to the Director, Department of Rural Development, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar, vide communication, dated 30.11.2023, for approval.
5. It is the further contention of the petitioner that although the petitioner firm was recommended as the lowest bidder, the Director, Department of Rural Development, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, in a most arbitrary manner, issued the Letter of Intent (LoI), dated 08.01.2024, awarding the work to the Respondent No. 8 and it was contended that the said Letter of Intent (LoI), dated 08.01.2024, was so issued ignoring the recommendation made by the Tender Evaluation Board. Being aggrieved, the present proceedings were so initiated by the petitioner, assailing the Letter of Intent (LoI), dated 08.01.2024.
6. Mr. Biswas, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, by taking this Court through the various terms and conditions as prescribed in the said Notice Inviting Tender (NIT), dated 11.08.2023, including the condition laying down the eligibility criteria required to be possessed by the tenderers bidding in pursuance to the same, submits that the Respondent No. 8 not being an enlisted firm under the provisions of the Arunachal Pradesh Enlistment of Contractors in Works Department Rules, 2008, was clearly ineligible for submitting its bids in pursuance of the said Notice Inviting Tender (NIT), dated 11.08.2023.
7. Mr. Biswas, learned counsel, by referring to the provisions of Clause 15 of the said Notice Inviting Tender (NIT), dated 11.08.2023, submits that the tender bids as received, is mandated to be evaluated by the Board constituted by the Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, Koloriang, at the district level and the Board on evaluation of the bids, is to recommend at least 3 firms as
The importance of full and fair disclosure of all material facts when invoking the court's jurisdiction, and the consequences of suppressing material facts in a writ petition.
The petitioner's duty to disclose all material facts without suppression or distortion, and the consequences of failing to do so, as established by the court's decision.
The court emphasized that the award of contracts should be in public interest and not interfered with unless there is evidence of malafide or irrationality.
Judicial intervention in tender processes is limited to cases of clear procedural violations or arbitrariness, emphasizing the importance of transparency and adherence to established norms.
An unsuccessful bidder cannot challenge the award of a tender if disqualified in the technical evaluation, as they lack standing to do so.
An unsuccessful bidder lacks standing to challenge the issuance of a Letter of Intent when disqualified for failing to meet mandatory requirements.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the authority approving tenders must act within the scope of their authority and provide justifiable reasons for their decisions, especially i....
A letter of intent is a precursor to a contract and does not create a binding legal relationship. Mandatory tender conditions, such as bid capacity, must be satisfied at the time of bid submission; a....
The Court established that compliance with all eligibility criteria in tender documents is essential, but public interest may prevent judicial interference in ongoing contracts.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
