A public body cannot reject a technical bid on grounds not explicitly stipulated in the tender notice (NIT), as doing so constitutes arbitrary, unfair, and unreasonable action in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Linked Case : WP(C)/315/2023

JUDGMENT & ORDER(ORAL)

Heard Mr. H Buragohain, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. I have also heard Mr. P Sarmah, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Assam Fisheries Development Corporation Ltd. (for short, ‘the AFDC’), and Mr. SK Goswami, the learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondent No.6 in WP(C)No.1215/2023.

The two writ petitions are inter-related, and as such, both the writ petitions are taken up for disposal by this common judgment & order.

The brief facts which led to the filing of both the writ petitions are that on 14.03.2022, the AFDC issued a Notice Inviting Tender (for short, the NIT), inviting bids for settlement of the Godadhar Meen Mahal in the District of Dhubri.

At the time of issuance of the said NIT, the minimum revenue which was fixed was Rs.15,89,372/-. Subsequent thereto, by the Corrigendum dated 22.03.2022, the minimum revenue was rectified and fixed at Rs.8,01,500/-. The petitioner being interested, participated in the said NIT and submitted a bid of Rs.1,19,00,000/- for a period of 7(seven) years. The petitioner was offered the settlement on 09.06.2022 and the petitioner was asked to deposit 25% of the revenue of the first year as security deposit and 25% of the revenue of the first year as first kist in the form of Demand Draft to be purchased in the name of “Assam Fisheries Development Corporation Limited” within 10 days from the receipt of the communication dated 09.06.2022. In addition to that, the petitioner was also asked to deposit a bank guarantee for the amount aforementioned before entering into the agreement. Subsequent thereto, a communication was issued by the Managing Director of the AFDC on 17.08.2022 stating inter alia, that in terms with the NIT No.1/2022 dated 14.03.2022, the minimum revenue was fixed at Rs.15,89,372/-, but in terms with the Corrigendum letter under reference, the earlier minimum revenue was rectified and fixed at Rs.8,01,500/-. The petitioner was, therefore, informed that the bank guarantee amount has been fixed at Rs.11,78,000/- and the petitioner was requested to enter into an agreement within 7(seven) days.

It is further seen that admittedly the petitioner did not enter into agreement, and resultantly, in terms with the communication dated 21.12.2022, the offer of settlement made in favour of the petitioner in respect to Godadhar Meen Mahal, vide the communication dated 09.06.2022 was cancelled and the possession of the Godadhar Meen Mahal was taken back from the petitioner. The petitioner, though submitted certain representation, but the said representation was not considered.

Be that as it may, the petitioner did not challenge the cancellation of the offer of settlement vide the communication dated 21.12.2022. The resultant effect is that on 16.12.2022, a new NIT being NIT No.20/2022 was published by the AFDC authorities in respect to the same Fishery i.e. Godadhar Meen Mahal in the district of Dhubri.

The petitioner submitted his bid along with various other bidders in pursuance to the NIT No.20/22 dated 16.12.2022. On 12.01.2023, a decision was taken by the respondent authorities to reject the technical bid of the petitioner in the Evaluation of Technical Bids meeting held on 12.01.2023. Thereupon, another notice was issued on 14.01.2023 by the Managing Director, AFDC, inviting technically qualified bidders to be present on 18.01.2023 for opening of the price bid in the conference hall of the AFDC at Guwahati. The petitioner submitted a representation on 17.01.2023 and sought for a copy of the comparative statement and the reasons for not calling him to be present for the opening of the price bid on 18.01.2023.

At this stage, it is pertinent to mention that the decision not to open the price bid of the petitioner as well as to reject the petitioner's technical bid was put to challenge in WP(C) No.315/2023. The said writ petition was filed on 18.01.2023, and this Court, vide