O R D E R

(Jabalpur, dtd.15.06.2021)

Per : Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.- The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 18-5-2021 passed by the respondent No.3, by which he has cancelled the notice inviting tender dated 02-03-2021, whereby tenders were invited for the work of painting of radial crest gate with hoist structure, stop-log gates, RBC sluice and emergency gate, LBC sluice and emergency gate with hoist structure, 70 tone gantry crane and replacement of rubber seal of 21 number of radial bearing tender id 2021_nvda_132264_1.

2. The petitioner is a joint venture of M/s Falcon Trading Company and M/s Krishna Enterprises. M/s Falcon Engineering is lead partner of the joint venture. The respondent No.3 issued a notice inviting tender on 02-03-2021 for the work of painting of radial crest gate with hoist structure, stop-log gates, RBC sluice and emergency gate, LBC sluice and emergency gate with hoist structure, 70 tone gantry crane and replacement of rubber seal of 21 number of radial. The petitioner was found to be technically qualified. It is asserted that the financial bid of the petitioner was also opened on 27-03-2021. The rate quoted by the petitioner amounting to Rs.2,13,18,424.94/- was found to be the lowest. In spite of completing all formalities, no steps were taken to award the tender in question in favour of the petitioner. Instead of awarding the work to the petitioner the respondent No.3 has now issued the impugned order dated 18-05-2021 whereby the said tender itself has been cancelled.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was found to be the lowest bidder in response to the first notice inviting tender, Annexure-P/5, dated 02-03-2021 having quoted Rs.2,13,18,424.94/- against the estimated sum of Rs.3,43,70524/- given in the NIT dated 02-03-2021. Even then the respondents have cancelled the earlier tender process and issued a fresh tender, Annexure-P/10, dated 25-5-2021. It is putforth that even though the scope of work as indicated therein, is the same, yet the cost of the work has now been enhanced to Rs.3,43,70524/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously urged that no reasons have been assigned for cancellation of the earlier tender process in the impugned order, Annexure-P/8. Notice was issued to the respondents and they were directed to file reply.

4. The respondents have filed reply and submitted that the tender of the petitioner was not as per the terms and conditions of the NIT. It is submitted that the joint venture agreement filed by the petitioner was not registered as per the requirement of Clause (f) of the joint venture agreement. With respect to the contention of the petitioner that the cost of work in the tender dated 25-5-2021 has been increased for the same scope of work, it is submitted that the competent authority has undertaken the revision of rates in the unified schedule of rates for the works of the Water Resources Department and on 8-03-2021 the revision of rates of work was issued in which the work to be undertaken (painting etc.) in which there has been revision in the work prescribed in the tender.

5. It is submitted that earlier in the tender dated 02-03-2021 old rates were prescribed in that painting upto the height of 1.5 metre. The respondents have filed a copy of the revised rates schedule, dated 8-03-2021 as Annexure-R/1 along with the report. It is stated that there was revision of rates with marginal increase, therefore, in the new tender dated 25-5-2021 the rates given in the revised rates schedule dated 8-03-2021, has been taken and the cost of the work has been increased. Thus, the respondents have justified the revision of rates in the return.

6. The respondents have further submitted that the NIT was issued on 02-03-2021 and three entities participated in the bid, namely, the petitioner, M/s Gala Construction and one P.S. Patel and the technical bid was opened on 26-03-2021. O