The rejection of bids based on failure to meet Evaluation Criteria does not violate principles of natural justice.

The above Writ Petitions are filed by the petitioners to issue writs of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 31.08.2016 issued by the 5th respondent and to quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to award the contract to the petitioners, since the petitioners were originally declared as L1 under the tender as per the finance bid released in their website.

2. The petitioner in W.P.No.32266 of 2016 is the Proprietor of M/s. Jai Maruthi Transport. The petitioner in W.P.No.32267 of 2016 is the Proprietor of M/s. Jeeva Roadlines and the petitioner in W.P.No.32268 of 2016 is the Proprietor of M/s. Arulmurugan Transport.

3. Since the relief sought for in all these Writ Petitions are one and the same, all the three Writ Petitions are disposed of by this common order.

4. The brief case of the petitioners is as follows:

(i) The petitioners applied for tender for road transportation of Bulk Petroleum products, separately, under General Category and quoted a price of L1. Further, the petitioners have been transporting the Indian Oil Corporation petroleum products for more than 20 years without any complaint. After the process of submission of the tenders and the evaluation of the bids, the petitioners were notified as L1 tenderers in the official website of the 5th respondent and in view of the same, they were entitled for the award of the contract. However, even after a lapse of six months since the tender process was completed, they were not awarded the contract. Hence, they sent mails to the respondents on the delay in the process. However, they received a text message that their tender bids have been rejected, though they were qualified and declared/notified as L1 by the 5th respondent. However, the respondents have not given any details as to under what circumstances the tenders submitted by the petitioners have been rejected. According to the petitioners, the transportation of the petroleum products is their only source of income and they have been doing it for the past 20 years.

(ii) While floating the tender, the 2nd respondent has fixed certain Eligibility Criteria. According to the petitioners, they have satisfied all the Eligibility Criteria and there is no compromise in any of the safety and other criteria so as to ensure that there is no tampering of the vehicle or the container. According to the petitioners, they have satisfied the Eligibility Criteria and qualified themselves in passing through the Technical Bid. Once the Technical Bid is accepted, the next step adhered is evaluation of the Financial Bid and while finalizing the same, they were declared as L1 by the 3rd respondent in their official website. Since the petitioners were declared as L1, there were waiting for the Work Order to be issued in their favour. Since no Work Order was forthcoming and there was delay, they sent mails to the respondents 3 & 4 for ascertaining the status of the tender. The petitioners received reply through SMS stating that the Bids were rejected during the financial evaluation by the duly constituted Committee on NIT requirement.

(iii) The petitioners sent letters dated 20.08.2016 and 25.08.2016 to the respondents asking the respondents as to how the bids could be rejected after being qualified under Eligibility Criteria, Technical Bid and Financial Bid. By their letter dated 31.08.2016, the respondent has stated that if the tenderers quoted the same L1 price, priority will be given to the dealers for their own load only. Further, according to the petitioners, they were not provided with an opportunity to negotiate on the rates quoted by the other bidders to match the Financial Bid of L1. The reply issued by the 5th respondent is in violation of the principles of natural justice. The tender conditions have been flouted and the same has been confirmed to the people,