Court ruled the rejection of a technical bid for using an authorized dealer's DSC was arbitrary as eligibility conditions were met, emphasizing fair competition in tender processes.

1. Heard Mr. A.D. Choudhury, learned counsel assisted by Mr. T. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 4776/2020. Also heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. Bx. Choudhury, learned counsel for the official respondent Nos. 1 to 3.1 have also heard Mr. D. Das, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Ms.T. Parasar, appearing for the respondent No. 4 which is also the writ petitioner in the connected W.P.(C) No. 5067/2020. For the sake of convenience, the facts involved in W.P.(C) No 4476 of 2020 is being referred to for the purpose of disposal of these writ petitions.

2. The facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that the Director of Agriculture, Assam, i.e. the respondent No. 2 herein had issued e-tender notice dated 06-10-2020 inviting bids, in two parts, for procurement of combine harvester under 'CMSGUY' scheme from the manufacturers whose products are enlisted in the list circulated by the Govt, of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare vide letter dated 18-02-2019. As per the NIT dated 06-10-2020, only those manufacturers possessing a valid Digital Signature Certificate (DSC) and who have registered in the e-procurement portal of the Government of Assam http://assamtenders.gov.in would be allowed to participate in the tender process. As per the schedule provided in the NIT, the start dated for downloading of bid document was fixed on 07-10-2020 at 10:00 a.m. which would remain open till 19-10- 2020 till 01:00 p.m. The online submission of bids was allowed upto 01:00 p.m. on 19-10- 2020. The bidders were also required to submit hard copy of the bid, the start date and time of which was 19-10-2020 at 11:00 am. and the end time for the same was fixed at 01:00 p.m. on the same day.

3. The writ petitioner herein being eligible to participate in the tender process had submitted its bid in two part i.e. technical and financial bid. Besides the writ petitioner, there were two other bidders viz, the respondent No. 4 (writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 5067/ 2020) and M/s Action Construction Equipment Ltd., who had submitted their tenders. During evaluation of the technical bids, it was found that the writ petitioner had uploaded its online bid by using the registration and DSC of it authorized dealer viz. M/s J.K. Engineering and Agro services. Taking note of the same, the Bid Evaluation Committee had held that the technical bid submitted by the writ petitioner was nonresponsive and accordingly, rejected the same. The bid submitted by M/s Action Construction Equipment Ltd was also held to be technically non-responsive and hence, rejected. Aggrieved by the decision of the authorities in rejecting the technical bid of the writ petitioner, the present petition has been filed assailing the impugned decision of the Bid Evaluation Committee recorded in the Minutes of Meeting (MoM) dated 03-11-2020.

4. The respondent No. 2 has filed counter-affidavit inter alia contending that not only had the petitioner uploaded its bid by using the registration and DSC of its authorized dealer but even the scanned copy of the Treasury Challan of Bid Cost as well as the Bid Security were not uploaded in the e-portal, as a result of which, the technical bid submitted by the petitioner was found to be nonresponsive. It is also the pleaded stand of the respondent No. 2 that as per Clause- 4 of the NIT, every bidder was compulsorily required to register in the e-procurement portal and possess a valid DSC. According to the respondent No. 2 the petitioner did not have a valid registration in the e- procurement portal of the Government of Assam as a result of which, it did not qualify to participate in the tender process.

5. The respondent No. 4 has also filed counter-affidavit raising similar objection pertaining to the validity of the technical bid submitted by the petitioner and accordingly, has prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. Besides the above, the respondent No. 4 has also instituted the connect