IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
VINEET SARAN AND B.R. SARANGI, JJ.
Chittaranjan Mishra - Petitioner
Versus
State of Odisha and others - Opp. Parties
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 4954 of 2016
Decided On : 01-09-2016
TENDER - TRANSPORT CONTRACTOR - [Section 14, Article 14 of the Constitution of India] - The court discussed the arbitrary and unreasonable enhancement of solvency, EMD, and security deposits in the tender documents for transportation of food grain under the Mid-Day-Meal Programme. The court found that the conditions were discriminatory and mala fide, favoring certain contractors and depriving small transport contractors from participating in the bid. The judgment quashed the tender call notice and set aside the selection of transport contractors, directing the authorities to make arrangements for a fresh tender with suitable terms and conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a transport contractor, was aggrieved by the arbitrary enhancement of solvency, EMD, and security deposits in the tender documents for transportation of food grain under the Mid-Day-Meal Programme. The petitioner had successfully completed previous tender work but was deprived of participating in the new tender due to the unreasonable conditions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the enhancement of deposits was arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminatory, and mala fide, favoring certain contractors and excluding small transport contractors. The court also noted that the conditions were not justified by the market cost of the rice and were intended to show favoritism to certain contractors.
Issues: The main issue was the arbitrary and discriminatory enhancement of solvency, EMD, and security deposits in the tender documents, leading to the exclusion of small transport contractors from participating in the bid.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the conditions stipulated in the tender call notice were arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminatory, and mala fide, and therefore quashed the notice and set aside the selection of transport contractors. The court directed the authorities to make arrangements for a fresh tender with suitable terms and conditions.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the tender call notice was quashed. The selection of transport contractors was set aside, and the authorities were directed to make arrangements for a fresh tender with suitable terms and conditions.
JUDGMENT :
B.R. SARANGI, J.
The petitioner is a transport contractor having valid transport license and belonging to rural area. He was awarded with the tender for transportation of food stuff for Mid Day Meal (MDM) in the year 2012-13 in the district of Khurda and successfully completed the same. The Collector-cum-Chairperson (MDM, Khurda)-opposite party no.2 issued a tender call notice on 29.02.2016 inviting sealed tenders from the intending registered transport contractors/agents having valid agent license/common carrier license for engagement of transporting agent under Mid-Day- Meal Programme for transportation of rice from FCI point to School points for the year 2016-17. The tender documents, complete in all respect along with required documents, were to be sent in sealed cover superscribed “sealed tender for undertaking transportation work of food grain (rice) under MDM programme-2016-17” addressed to the District Education Officer, Khurda by registered post/speed post. The last date of receipt of the tender documents was 21.03. 2016 by 1.00 P.M. and date of opening of the tenders was 21.03.2016 at 5.00 P.M. in the office of the Addl. District Magistrate, Bhubaneswar. As per the terms and conditions of the tender notice, clause-10 requires that recent solvency certificate issued by the competent authority for Rs.50,00,000/- only, who applied for the whole district, and Rs.10,00,000/- only, who applied for one block, should be furnished by the tenders along with the tender paper. Clause-11 requires that earnest money deposit of Rs.1,00,000/- only per block (multiple of Rs.1,00,000/-, if applied for more than one block) in shape of bank drafts/postal savings pass book/bank pass book/NSC/term deposit duly pledged in favour of the District Project Management Unit (DPMU), MDM, Khurda should be furnished along with the tender paper. The security deposit has been enhanced from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.5,00,000/-; EM.D. has been enchanced from 26,500/- to Rs.1,00,000/- and solvency cost also has been enhanced from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.10,00,000/-. Being aggrieved by such terms and conditions of the tender documents, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present application.
2. Ms. Saswati Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously urged that there was no rationality in the enhancement of EMD, solvency certificate and security deposits and, as such, the enhancement of deposits on different rates pursuant to the tender documents of the year 2016-17 is arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. By fixation of such conditions, the opposite parties have tried to eliminate small transporting contractors/agents and encourage the big contractors. If such tender conditions are allowed to exist, that would lead to an unhealthy competition, which is absolutely unreasonable, arbitrary and dehorse the provisions of law. It is further urged that the food stuff are being transported under different schemes, namely, Public Distribution System (PDS), SNP and Mid-Day-Meal (MDM). So far as the conditions for transporting of food stuff under PDS and SNP schemes are concerned, there was no change in the conditions which were prevailing earlier whereas in respect of transporting under MDM scheme, the conditions have been substantially changed without assigning any reasons thereof. Apart from the same, it is further urged that due to non-availability of transport contractors/agents because of change of conditions, it has only been confined to some of the transporters belonging to Bhubaneswar and the rural transporters have practically been excluded, though there was no allegation against them and they had successfully completed their tender work assigned in the previous years. It is stated that the transporters/agents of the Bhubaneswar have been assigned to transport food stuff in res
Directorate of Education and others v. Educomp Datamatics Ltd. and others
Michigan Rubber (India) Limited v. State of Karnataka and others
S.S. and Company v. Orissa Mining Corporation Limited
Tata Cellular v. Union of India
Union of India and others v. Dinesh Engineering Corporation and another
AI
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.