IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI &

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANURADHA SHUKLA ON THE

20th OF NOVEMBER, 2024 WRIT PETITION No. 34694 of 2024 M/S R. PRIYANSHI CONSTRUCTION AND FACILITY AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MP K AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Anshuman Singh- Advocate for petitioners.

Shri Kapil Duggal- Advocate for respondents No. 2 and 3.

ORDER

Per: Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari Heard finally with the consent of both the parties.

2. This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following relief:-

(i) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus setting aside the rejection of the Technical Bid of the petitioner (Annexure P3).

(ii) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus setting aside the result of the Financial /Commercial Bid issued by the respondents.(Annexure P7)

(iii) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to open the Financial/ Commercial Bid of the petitioner upon declaring the petitioner technically compliant;

(iv) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to assign reasons for the rejection of the technical Bid of the petitioner and grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner qua the reasons assigned thereto;

(v) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of Clause 34 of the RFP documents and condone any infirmity, irregularity or otherwise, if the same does not constitute a material deviation;

(vi) To award the petitioner costs and damages as the Honourable Court may deem fit;

(vii) Any other relief which the Honourable Court may deem just and fit.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner No. 1 is the proprietorship firm. The petitioner No. 2 is proprietor of petitioner firm. The petitioner firm who is principally engaged in the business of the supply of manpower to various Governmental & Non-Governmental Organisations / Institutions and enjoys a reputation of being a reliable contractor with a longstanding history of successful executed contracts. The respondent-Corporation issued NIT for outsourcing of manpower required for Cleaning and Sweeping Works for Five Groups under the jurisdiction of respondent No. 2- Municipal Corporation. Thereafter, respondent No. 2 issued corrigendum on 11.03.2024 whereby they had prescribed certain documents which have to be uploaded/provided along with bid/application. The respondent-Corporation subsequently issued another corrigendum on 12.03.2024 whereby certain conditions contained in corrigendum issued on 11.03.2024 were modified and Vide corrigendum dated 15.03.204 the respondent-Corporation extended the last date for uploading tender documents upto 30.03.2024. The petitioner submitted their bids in pursuance of aforesaid NIT with the respondent-Corporation in prescribed format disclosing all the relevant information wherein all the necessary documents as sought by the respondent-Corporation including corrigendums were filed. However, vide order dated 06.09.2024 (Annexure-P/3) and 23.10.2024 (AnnexureP/7), the respondent- Corporation without assigning any reason disqualified the petitioner in the technical evaluation.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent- Corporation without assigning any reason has rejected the technical bid. In fact the corporation itself in the earlier round had made a submission that the representation shall be considered and thereafter they would assign reasons for rejection. The reasons assigned for rejection is that the petitioner did not fulfill the conditions as laid down in the General Eligibility Criteria at Clause Nos. 3, 4 and 9. The General Eligibility Criteria for Bidders reads as under:-

The essential eligibility criteria for bidders:-