Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
NUPUR BHATI, J.
M/s Yash Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17123 of 2023, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17037 of 2023, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17011 of 2023
Decided on : 14-12-2023
Tender Rejection - Public Procurement - Rajasthan Transparency and Public Procurement Act 2012, Section 26 - The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging the rejection of the tender and re-invitation of the tender for construction works. The court held that the procuring entity had the right to reject bids and re-invite tenders as per the provisions of the Rajasthan Transparency and Public Procurement Act 2012 and the Rajasthan Transparency and Public Procurement Rules, 2013.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a sole proprietorship firm, participated in a tender for construction works. After being declared as the L-1 Bidder, the tender was rejected by the respondent authorities, leading to the filing of writ petitions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the rejection of the tender and re-invitation of the tender by the procuring entity was justified under the relevant provisions of the Rajasthan Transparency and Public Procurement Act 2012 and the Rajasthan Transparency and Public Procurement Rules, 2013.
Issues: The main issue was whether the rejection of the tender and re-invitation of the tender by the procuring entity was in accordance with the law.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the procuring entity had the right to reject bids and re-invite tenders as per the provisions of the Rajasthan Transparency and Public Procurement Act 2012 and the Rajasthan Transparency and Public Procurement Rules, 2013.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions and all pending applications, upholding the rejection of the tender and re-invitation of the tender by the procuring entity.
ORDER :
1. These petitions have been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:-
(a) The record of the case may kindly be called for;
(b) The office order/office comment dated 05.10.2023 (Annexure-6) whereby the Committee has decided to reject the tender and re-invite the tender may be quashed and set aside.
(c) The respondents may kindly be directed to issue LOI in favour of the petitioner.
(d) Any other appropriate writ or order or direction which is favorably to the petitioners in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted to the petitioners.
(e) That the costs of the writ petition be also awarded in favour of the petitioner.”
2. Since common questions of facts and law are involved in these writ petitions, therefore, the same are decided by this common order and for the purpose of deciding this bunch of matters, facts of SBCWP No.17011/2023 are being taken into consideration.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a sole proprietorship firm registered in the name and style of M/s Yash Enterprises, registered with Government of India bearing GST Registration No.08AQXPJ8813B1ZJ.
4. A notice inviting bid was issued by the Office of Superintending Engineer (Civil) RVPNL, Jodhpur on 19.07.2023 (Annexure-2), for construction of Control Room, Quarters, Store, Guard Hut, Boundary Wall, Civil Foundation, Cable Trench, L&D, Gravelling and Water Supply and Harvesting System and other misc. works in yard at 132 KV G.S.S. Chandrak.
5. The petitioner firm qualified the technical bid and the financial bid was opened on 19.09.2023 (Annexure-3) and the petitioner was declared as L-1 Bidder, as he had quoted lowest amount for tender.
6. An email dated 30.09.2023 (Annexure-4) was received by the petitioner firm which was sent by the Chief Engineer (Civil) RVPN Jaipur, which asked the petitioner to be present before the Authority on 03.10.2023 for negotiation of rates for the above work and the said direction was complied with by the petitioner firm and agreed to reduce the rates as per the instructions of the respondent Department.
7. A meeting was held on 05.10.2023 comprising of six members i.e. Chairman and Managing Director RVPN Jaipur, Director (Technical) RVPN Jaipur, Director (Fincance) RVPN Jaipur, Chief Engineer (Civil) RVPN Jaipur, ACE (Civil) RVPN Jodhpur and Senior AO (Civil) RVPN, Jodhpur, which observed tha the petitioner firm was the L-1 bidder i.e. firm who has quoted the lowest amount for the bid and has initially quoted @ 3.96% above for BOQ-1 and 3.98% above for BOQ-2 and BOQ-3 and for BOQ-4 item 1 @ Rs.175 per cum for BOQ-4 item 2 @ Rs.1070 per sq. meter, total amounting to Rs.57682259.70 including all taxes, but the respondents decided to reject this tender in view of the higher rates and further, a decision was taken to re-invite the tender (Annexure-5).
8. Being aggrieved of the office order/office comment dated 05.10.2023 (Annexure-5) passed by the respondent authorities, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the office order/office comment dated 05.10.2023, has been passed without jurisdiction and is ex-facie; illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable and therefore, deserves to be quashed and set aside, because:-
(a) The first appellate authority to which the appeal would lie, in case of any grievance, would be the Board of Director RRVPNL and the impugned office order/office comment dated 05.10.2023 has been passed by the committee comprising of six members, which are Board of Directors.
(b) The respondent authority in the office order/office comment dated 05.10.2023 are themselves accepting that the petitioner is the L-1/lowest bidder and had been called for negotiation to reduce the rates and also agreed to the fact that the petit
The procuring entity has the right to reject bids and re-invite tenders as per the provisions of the Rajasthan Transparency and Public Procurement Act 2012 and the Rajasthan Transparency and Public P....
The procuring entity has the discretion to cancel tenders and re-invite bids without prior communication of reasons; judicial review is limited to assessing arbitrariness or statutory violations in p....
The authority has the discretion to reject bids and conduct negotiations, provided they comply with statutory requirements.
Point of Law : Where the parties had executed lease deeds incorporating therein the rights, liabilities and obligations of the parties inter se, in the case in hand, the parties had not entered into ....
Material deficiencies in a bid cannot be cured under the Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Act, 2012, affecting the bid's responsiveness.
The cancellation of a bid for any reason cannot be questioned unless there is mala fide on the part of the State or its agencies.
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
