JUDGMENT :

1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

“It is therefore, humbly prayed, that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and :

i. by an appropriate writ, order or direction, quash the Tender process initiated by TENDER No.MSTC/JPR/Directorate of Mines & Geology Rajasthan Udaipur/54/Udaipur/23-24/15159 dated 10.7.2023 and may be directed to initiate the tender process afresh with all consequential directions;

ii. without prejudice to the prayer clause-i and in the alternative by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the technical bid of the petitioner and further the respondents may kindly be directed to allow the petitioner to submit its Initial Price Offer with all consequential directions;

iii. Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

iv. Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner.”

2. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the petitioner-Company, are that the respondent issued a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT NO. MSTC/JPR/Directorate of Mines & Geology Rajasthan Udaipur/54/Udaipur/23-24/15159) on 10.07.2023 for the purpose of granting of mining leases/composite license for the blocks of Major Mineral. The last date for purchase of tender document was fixed as 25.07.2023, upon payment of a fees to the tune of Rs. 2 Lacs and the last date of submitting the technical bid along with the requisite documents was 14.08.20203 (upto 1.00 PM).

2.1 The petitioner submitted the tender in question and also

submitted a physical copy of the technical bid along with bank guarantee to the tune of Rs. 89,52,375/-on 10.08.2023; thereafter, the petitioner attempted to upload the technical bid along with Initial Price Offer (IPO) online on the respondent’s portal before the deadline, but due to some technical glitch/ error, the same could not be uploaded in time.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner made all efforts to submit its technical bid in time and the petitioner firstly contacted the help desk of the respondent portal on 14.08.2023 at 11.24 AM and bring the technical glitch/ error to their notice; such glitch/error clearly reveals that same plagued the online portal of the respondent.

3.1. Learned counsel further submitted that no third party right was created, if the bid of the petitioner is accepted. It was further submitted that the petitioner deposited the prescribed fee of Rs. 2 Lacs and also arranged the bank guarantee of Rs.89,52,375/-within time, which clearly shows the bona fides of the petitioner. In Support of his submissions relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Dr Vijay Laxmi Sadho Vs Jagdish (2001) 2 SCC 247.

3.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the identical controversy came up before a Coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court at Jaipur Bench in the case of Smo Ferro Alloys Pvt Ltd. Vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.(S.B.C.W.P. No. 9814/2023, decided on 07.07.2023), whereupon, the said writ petition was allowed, with a direction to the respondents to consider the technical bid of the petitioner therein, as submitted physically, and if the petitioner is found technically qualified, then to accept the IPO of the petitioner physically, as it is stated that the online option once closed cannot be reopened, and allow the petitioner to participate in the tender process, as per merit.

“ANALYSIS

8. Heard the arguments advanced by both the sides, scanned the record of the writ petition and considered the judgments cited at Bar.

9. The limited issue which is to be decided by this Court is whether the petitioner was prevented from uploading the technical bid along with IPO online for reasons beyond its control and if yes, what r