IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Nupur Bhati, J.
Mahadev Stone Crusher - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Public Works Department and ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17666/2024
Decided On : 05-12-2024
ORDER :
Nupur Bhati, J.
1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 challenging the Letter dated 09.10.2024 (Annex.4) and impugned order dated 14.10.2024 (Annex.7) issued by Respondent no.3/Superintending Engineer.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:
(A) The letter dated 09.10.2024 (Annex-4) issued by the respondent no.3 be declared illegal arbitrary and be quashed and set aside;
(B) The actions/decisions on the part of the Respondent-PWD while issuing fresh NIT No. 04/2024-25 (Annex-8) be declared illegal, arbitrary and be quashed and set aside;
(C) Consequently, the Impugned order dated 14.10.2024 (Annex-7) may kindly be declared illegal and may be quashed and set aside;
(D) The Respondents may kindly be directed to decide the representation preferred by the petitioner by passing a speaking and reasoned order.
(E) The respondent may be directed to issue work order in favour of the petitioner in furtherance of the NIT No. 01/2024-25 (Annex-2);
(F) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case may be passed in favour of the petitioner.”
3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondent-Public Works Department, Dungarpur issued the NIT No. 01/2024-25 dated 30.08.2024 (Annex.2) for the Construction of various BT roads at 8 different sites (under budget announcement 2024-2025) including the Package No. RJ-14-04 in PWD Division, Simalwara, District Dungarpur. The Petitioner participated in the tender process and when the technical and financial bids were opened on 28.09.2024, the Petitioner emerged as the lowest bidder in 5 out of 8 sites while quoting the lowest bid at 12.02 % below the actual estimated price in the NIT dated 30.08.2024 (Annex.2). Thus, the petitioner was identified as the lowest bidder and the petitioner was placed at L-1. Thereafter, the respondent no.3/Superintending Engineer, PWD, Zone Dungarpur, issued a letter dated 09.10.2024 (Annex.4) wherein, it was stated that the petitioner quoted its bid at 12.02% below the estimated price for construction of various BT Road in Package No. RJ-14-04 in PWD Division, Simalwara, District Dungarpur, whereas the other contractors has quoted their bid at around 25% below the estimated price in other works of similar nature and the bid submitted by the petitioner seems higher to the market rates. Therefore, the petitioner was directed to submit its negotiated bid within 3 days. The petitioner in pursuance to the letter dated 09.10.2024 (Annex.4), issued by the respondent no.3, submitted its reply dated 11.10.2024 (Annex.5), wherein it was stated by the petitioner that the original bid that was quoted by the petitioner was at 12.02% below the estimated price, however, it was ready to accept the work at the rate of 12.5% below the estimated price. Thereafter, as no further action was taken pursuant to the reply dated 11.10.2024 (Annex.5), the petitioner personally visited the office of the respondent no.3 and requested him to address the grievances of the petitioner. However, as no heed was paid to the grievances of the petitioner by the respondent no.3, the petitioner preferred a representation to the respondent No. 2 to 4 through email on 15.10.2024 wherein, the petitioner raised its grievances and prayed that representation filed by the petitioner be accepted and the petitioner may kindly be awarded the work order. In the meanwhile the Respondent no.3 vide order dated 13.10.2024 (Annex.R/2) rejected the bids received in pursuance of NIT dated 30.08.2024 (Annex.2) for construction of road in Package No. RJ-14-01, RJ-14-02, RJ-14-03, RJ-14-04, RJ-14-05 and RJ-14-06 in
The authority has the discretion to reject bids and conduct negotiations, provided they comply with statutory requirements.
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 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....
Tender evaluation must adhere strictly to the established criteria, and rejection based on erroneous interpretations undermines fairness and legality in public procurement processes.
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 ....
The rejection of bids by public authorities must adhere to the principles of fairness, reasonableness, and non-arbitrariness as mandated by Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Judicial review in government contracts allows for negotiation with all tenderers, not just the lowest bidder, as established by procedural guidelines.
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.