BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
C.V. KARTHIKEYAN, J.
C. Ajay Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Kanyakumari & Others – Respondents
W.P. (MD) No. 20527 of 2022
Decided On : 16-03-2023
Tender Process - Solid Waste Management - Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tender Acts - Section 11 - [a)The tender shall be two cover system. b) Tenderer shall have 3 years continuous experience c) Annual turnover of tenderer the three financial years shall be above Rs.Fifty lakhs. d) The minimum wages of Rs.550/- fixed by the District Collector shall to be altered and service charges hall not exceed @ Rs.10%. e) All the tenders will be evaluated and the bid price of the tenderers having technical capability will be opened.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking to quash the tender process for Solid Waste Scheme of Mandaikadu Panchayat, alleging irregularities in the process and challenging the selection of the successful bidder.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner failed to provide necessary documents and certificates as required by the tender conditions, and the tender process was conducted transparently without any mala fide intentions.
Issues: The issues revolved around the alleged irregularities in the tender process, the eligibility of the successful bidder, and the timing of the opening of the bids.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of adhering to the tender conditions and providing necessary documentation. It also highlighted the limited scope for judicial interference in tender processes and the availability of appeal mechanisms under Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tender Acts.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was ordered to bear the costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the tender notification issued by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.39/2022/A1, dated 20.04.2022 and to quash the entire process of tender, as illegal and further, to direct the respondents herein to allot the tender on the basis of lowest bid price to the petitioner for the Solid Waste Scheme of Mondaikadu Panchayat for the financial year from 2022 to 2023.)
1. This Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the tender notification issued by the third respondent/Executive Officer, Mandaikadu Selection Grade Town Panchayat in Na.Ka.No.39/2022/A1, dated 20.04.2022, and to quash the entire process of tender and to direct the respondents herein to allot the tender on the basis of lowest bid price to the petitioner for the Solid Waste Scheme of Mandaikadu Panchayat for the financial year 2022-2023.
2. Heard Mr.A.Rajkumar Sen, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.N.Muthu Vijayan, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. In the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition, the petitioner, C.Ajay Kumar, Secretary of Paruthiviai MinMini Samooga Nala Narpani Sangam, Mandaikadu, in Kanyakumari District, had stated that he was the Secretary of the said organization, which is a registered Society in No.SRG/Kanyakumari/76/2022 engaged in sanitation and public welfare. The said society was founded in the year 2014. It had also been stated that the third respondent/ Executive Officer, Mandaikadu Selection Grade Town Panchayat,Kanyakumari District had issued tender notification in Na.Ka.No.39/2022/A1, dated 19.04.2022 published in the daily vernacular newspaper on 20.04.2022 for outsourcing man power for Solid Wastage Scheme. The conditions, which were imposed, are as follows:
“a) The tender shall be two cover system.
b) Tenderer shall have 3 years continuous experience
c) Annual turnover of tenderer the three financial years shall be above Rs.Fifty lakhs.
d) The minimum wages of Rs.550/- fixed by the District Collector shall to be altered and service charges hall not exceed @ Rs.10%.
e) All the tenders will be evaluated and the bid price of the tenderers having technical capability will be opened.”
4. The petitioner had participated in the tender and submitted documents on 29.04.2022 before 03.00 pm. It had been stated that the fixed contract labour outsourcing is Rs.550/- per head with bid price of 5% termed as service charges. Three tenderers had participated, namely,a) Shawn Security Force, Chanthaiyadi, b) Puliyoor Salai Labour Contract Cooperative Society Limited, No.7115 and c) Paruthivilai Minimini Samooga Nala Narpani Sangam. It had been alleged that the tender was not opened on 29.04.2022 at 03.00 pm, but only on 30.04.2022, the next day. It had been alleged that the per head wages of Rs.550/- is a fixed amount and there cannot be any change and that the service charges should not exceed 10%. It had been stated that the respondent had chosen the Puliyoor Salai Labour Contract Cooperative Society Limited, against the rules. Questioning the selection of such Society, the present Writ Petition had been filed.
5. A counter had been filed by the third respondent, wherein, they had denied all the allegations relating to mala fide in the tender process and had stated that originally, four bidders have received the tender schedule and three had submitted tender applications in sealed covers. It had stated that when the technical bids were opened, it was found that only one of the tenderers was eligible and the other two including the petitioner were found ineligible. The petitioner had not provided any evidence and documents for experience, for minimum annual turnover and for other basic eligibility, as provided in the notifica
Tender authorities must adhere to statutory criteria and act transparently; courts will not interfere unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or malafide conduct is presented.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for transparency and adherence to tender regulations, including the need for valid qualifications in the technical bid, as per the ....
Judicial review in tender matters is limited; rejection based on non-compliance with tender conditions is not arbitrary.
Lowest bidder has no vested right to contract; authority may cancel tender for valid reasons like cartel without malice; tender conditions not judicially reviewable unless arbitrary.
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.