The Commission had received two separate information concerning bid rigging and manipulation of the process of tender for the supply of certain medical equipments and medical systems to the government hospitals. In case no. 43 of 2010, the Commission after conducting inquiries has found that M/s PES Installation Pvt. Ltd. (OP- 4 or PES in the instant case) together with two other firms, M/s. MDD Medical System (India) Pvt. Ltd (MDD) and M/s. Medical Product Services (MPS), had rigged the bids and manipulated the process of tender involving supply of Modular Operation Theatre (MOT) and Medical Gas Manifold System (MGMS) to Sports Injury Centre, Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi. The Commission has also passed order under section 27 of the Act in that case holding the three firms in contravention of the provisions of section 3(3)(d) of the Act. The present matter relates to information filed by Shri Gulshan Verma, director of Unissi System Private Limited in another case (case no. 40 of 2010) in which bid rigging and cartelization has been alleged in the supply of medical equipments in the tender of Jai Prakash Narain Apex Trauma Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi (JPNA).

2. The facts and allegations as per the information in case no. 40 of 2010, in brief, are as follows:

2.1 It has been brought out that on 18.03.2010, the OP-1 published an advertisement in the news papers inviting bids for supply of pre-fabricated Modular Operation Theater (MOT) alongwith preparation, scrub and dirty linen rooms. The date of submission of the said tender was on or before 14.04.2010 and it was to be opened on 15.04.2010.

2.2 Unissi System Private Limited in which the informant is a director submitted its tender on 14.04.2010. The tender was required to be submitted in two parts (i) Techno Commercial Bid in one and (ii) Financial Bid in another sealed cover. Both these covers were to be kept together in a one outer cover. On 15.04.2010, the tender was opened, and the informant's company was informed by the Assistant Store Purchase Officer of JPNA that envelope containing its financial bid was found open. The informant objected to this stating that it had been done deliberately to oust it from the bidding process. On 11.05.2010, the informant received a letter from OP-1 for making a technical presentation/demonstration of the quoted model on 12.05.2010. On 25.05,2010 the Informant again sent a letter to the Chief of JPNA, All MS (OP-2) drawing his attention towards involvement of OP-4 in cartelization and bid rigging. However, the OP-2 ignored the same since he was also a party to -the whole act.

2.3 The informant further sent a letter on 14.06.2010 to OP-1 reiterating his prayer to cancel the present bidding process. On 17.06.2010, the JPNA Trauma Center reverted to the informant, and informed that there was a violation of two bid procedure in the informant's offer due to which its bid offer was rejected. It was also informed that only the offer of PES had been accepted by the Committee.

2.4 It has been alleged in the information that the OP-1 to 3 have favoured the OP-4 (PES) while awarding tender for the supply of pre-fabricated Modular Operation Theatre along with other associated items. Although there were many deficiencies in the technical bid of M/s PES, they were ignored by the technical committee. The informant also wrote a letter dated 02.07.2010 the Chief of Trauma Centre drawing his attention towards favour given to PES installations.

2.5 The Informant has submitted that while PES offered various items like the wall system, ceiling system, Laminar Air Flow system, wall cabinet system, exhaust ducts, doors, illumination lights, control panel, pass through cabinet, X-Ray viewing screen from multiple sources and not from single manufacturer/vendor, two other technically qualified bidders in the case had quoted these items from one manufacturer/vendor.

2.6 PES had not offered Laminar Air Flow system as per DIN 1946 Standards