JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the 1st respondent in the impugned order dated 11.10.2020 bearing No.Lr.No.H-50/1/2019-e Gov-Ceg/TNeGa and quash the Work Order allotted to the 3rd Respondent as L1 as arbitrary, illegal, ultra vires.)

1. The subject matter of challenge in the present Writ Petition pertains to declaring the 3rd Respondent as the successful bidder in the E-tender notification dated 15.01.2020, through the proceedings of the 1st Respondent dated 11.10.2020.

2. The Petitioner is the consortium partner of M/s. ABM Knowledge ware Ltd., under a consortium agreement dated 20.03.2020 and this consortium agreement itself was entered into for the purpose of participating in the E-Tender floated by the 1st Respondent. The TNeGA is developing a state wide single window system which will be web enabled and citizen oriented in order to facilitate transparency in working, comfortable filing from the end user’s side and also to keep digitised records for the futuristic use by the authorities. In this portal, a citizen can apply for the planning permission, building permission and plan approval, layout approval, completion certificate etc. In addition, the architect, licensed surveyors, engineers can also register their profile in their respective eligible departments. It was done to ensure that in certain approvals, more than one department may be involved and, in those scenarios, the interface between the workflow of two or more departments must be hassle free without change in the records.

3. Keeping the above in mind, the 1st Respondent issued an E-tender notification dated 15.01.2020, inviting tender for the work of Development & Maintenance of State Wide Single Window Web Portal for On-line Submission, Processing and Disposal of Planning Permission Applications, Building Permission Applications, Completion Certificate, Reclassification and Layout approval for DTCP, DTP, GCC and CMA (DDGC).

4. After the issuance of the notification, several technical queries were raised by several bidders. Hence, pre-bid meeting was conducted and even corrigendum was issued and the date of submission of the tender was also postponed. The Petitioner company, in fact, had filed Writ Petition Nos.3679 of 2020 and 5482 of 2020, questioning certain statements made against the company’s software and certain conditions imposed in the notification. Thereafter, taking into consideration the various queries raised, certain clauses in the notification were also amended and ultimately it enabled the Petitioner and other bidders to participate in the auction.

5. There were totally four bidders who had submitted the bid and the bids were opened by the scrutiny committee on 05.06.2020. The tender scrutiny committee evaluated the technical bids as per the eligibility criteria and evaluation criteria as prescribed in the notification and ultimately through technical presentation, for all the four bidders. Two of the bidders scored below 70 marks and hence they were found ineligible to participate for the financial bid opening. The Petitioner and the 3rd Respondent scored sufficient marks and they were found to be qualified for opening of the financial bid. The scrutiny committee opened the financial bids of the Petitioner and the 3rd Respondent and based on the rate quoted by them, the 3rd Respondent was identified as the L1 bidder and the bid was given in favour of the 3rd Respondent on 30.07.2020. The work order was issued on 01.10.2020 and it is stated that the 3rd Respondent thereafter commenced the work.

6. The Petitioner, aggrieved by the decision taken in favour of the 3rd Respondent and allotting the work in his favour, has filed the present