IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that evaluation criteria in tender documents must be clearly disclosed to ensure fairness, and valid licenses under the Contract Labour Act cannot be arbitrarily deemed invalid.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. R. Singha, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. M. Katoky, learned Standing Counsel for the Department of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary, Government of Assam who is representing the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, Mr. H. K. Das, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.5, 6 and 7 and Mr. D. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate for the State of Assam, who had assisted this Court on request for purpose of dealing with the provision of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 and the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Assam Rules, 1971.

2. The Director of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Department, Guwahati had floated a Notice Inviting Tender on 23.02.2024 for the construction of a New Multicare Hospital including Logistics at Joysagar in Sivasagar District under SOPD-G. The petitioner and the private respondents submitted their Bids for the aforesaid work. The Bid Evaluation Committee, (hereinafter referred to as Evaluation Committee) after evaluation of the Bid, while declaring the Bids of the private respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 to be responsive, had declared the Bid of the petitioner to be non-responsive in its meeting dated 01.07.2024 for the reason that the labour license submitted by the petitioner is valid for Kamrup (M), District only. Being aggrieved by the impugned action on the part of the Evaluation Committee, the present writ petition is filed.

3. Mr. R. Singha, learned counsel for the petitioner argues the following:-

I. The ground of rejection of the petitioner’s Technical Bid is absolutely fallacious in view of the fact that the copy of the labour license indicates that the labour license is valid for Kamrup (Metro) District, however, the license itself declares that the said license is valid for undertaking the work of contract and supply in the establishment of the Director of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, Assam and therefore, the petitioner is eligible for undertaking any contractual work in Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department. Therefore, the rejection is absolutely arbitrary and irrational.

II. The Minutes clearly reveal that the committee sought shortfall documents from the private respondent Nos. 6 and 7 and such a course of action is not permissible under biding terms and the same has been done only to facilitate the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 and the petitioner was not granted such benefit.

III. The petitioner had substantially complied with the requirement of a valid labour license inasmuch as his labour license is valid in terms of the Contract Labour ( Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1970) and the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Assam Rules, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as Rules, 1971). The certificate of the principal employer clarifies that the petitioner’s license permits, the use of contract labour under any work of the Veterinary Department.

IV. The petitioner had substantially complied with all the mandatory requirements, however, such facts have been ignored and an unfair process has been adopted to oust the petitioner from the race of the tender. Therefore, there is no fair play on the action of the authorities and such action is not permissible under the procedure prescribed in ITB, more particularly Clause 35.

V. Under different provisions of the Act, 1970 more particularly, the definition given under the Act, 1970, Section 12, Section 20 of the Act, and Rules 21, 24, 25, 32 of the Rule, 1971 and Form-IV, V and VI, a labour license can be issued when a contractor is already engaged or proposed to be engaged and such license is work specific and therefore, for all meaning and purport, insistence by the the respondent authorities of labour license is only for purpose of examining whether the bidder is having any earlier experience in contract labour or not.

VI. In terms of clauses 30, 31, 32 of the instruction to bidder and Clause 2 of Section IV of the bid document and also