Judicial review of tender awards emphasizes the need for compliance with essential conditions while allowing governmental discretion in contract decisions unless tainted by arbitrariness or mala fides.

1. Heard Shri Mohd. Mansoor, learned counsel for petitioners, learned State Counsel, learned counsel appearing for respondents Nos. 2 to 5 and Shri Sanjay Bhasin, Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri Sunil Sharma, appearing on behalf of respondent No. 6.

2. By means of present writ petition the petitioners has prayed for quashing of order dated 01.12.2018 by which respondent No. 6, M/s Hotel Rajasthan was declared as lowest bidder for providing Patient Kitchen and Dietary Services in Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow and consequential work order dated 01.12.2018, as contained in Annexure No. 1 to writ petition, issued in favour of respondent No. 6 - M/s Hotel Rajasthan.

3. Shri Mohd. Mansoor, learned counsel for petitioners submits that the Director of Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow (hereinafter referred as 'Institute') on 28.09.2018 invited e - tender for 'Patient Kitchen and Dietary Services'. The said e - tender was in two parts, Technical Bid and Financial Bid. Subsequently, on 18.10.2018 and 14.11.2018 corrigendums were also issued. In response to the same the petitioners along with following firms submitted tender bid:
1). M/s Mohani Caterers, Ahmedabad.
2). M/s Buddha India Hotels Pvt. Ltd, Lucknow.
3). M/s Capri Hospitality Services Pvt Ltd, Indore.
4). M/s Vrindavan Enterprises, Gorakhpur.
5). M/s Hotel Rajasthan, Khagaria.
6). M/s Amrit Foods, Lucknow.
3.1 Subsequently by means of impugned order dated 01.12.2018 (annexed as Annexure No. 1) tender in regard to 'Patient Kitchen and Dietary Services' in the 'Institute' has been awarded to respondent No. 6 - M/s Hotel Rajasthan, for an amount of Rs. 7,19,82,470.12/- by the respondent 'Institute'.
3.2 The quotation submitted by various parties against the aforesaid e - tender is reproduced as under:
(Tabular Matter Is Omitted Ed)

4. Shri Mohd. Mansoor, learned counsel for petitioners while challenging the impugned order submitted that the action on part of the official respondents i.e. authorities of the 'Institute' thereby accepting the tender and awarding the work in question in favour of respondent No. 6 is contrary to terms and conditions of the e - tender and requires interference by this Court.

5. Elaborating his arguments he submits that Clause 3 of Section II of the bid 'Instruction for Technical and Financial Bid', which is a part of e - tender, provides rejection of bid in certain contingencies. Under Sub-Clause 'd' of Clause '3' it is mentioned that the bid shall be rejected if authenticity of any of the supporting document is found to be fabricated and in the instant case the bid of respondent No. 6 ought to have been rejected under Clause 3(d) of bid documents on account of reasons that:
(i) With tender documents respondent No. 6 submitted experience certificate dated 26.11.2018 issued by Hind Institute of Medical Sciences, however the said experience certificate is a forged document and in this regard he submitted that the Chairperson of Management Committee of Hind Institute of Medical Sciences has sent a letter stating therein that no such certificate was issued in favour of the respondent No. 6.
(ii) Respondent no. 6 in support of his bid also submitted experience certificate dated 27.11.2018 issued by the Nova Hospitals Limited, Lucknow. However, on enquiry, Dr. Pancham Singh, one of the authorities of the Nova Hospitals Limited, Lucknow clarified that M/s Hotel Rajasthan has provided dietary services on our verbal instructions to patients on chargeable basis