ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 05-10-2024

1. The petitioner is aggrieved with the disqualification made on consideration of a complaint made by the respondent nos. 6 and 7. Pursuant to an NIT, 15 bidders had submitted their tenders out of which one alone was disqualified as per Annexure-3. Two of the qualified bidders raised objections against the technical bid qualification of the others, including that of the petitioner; who also stood qualified. A further meeting was conducted by the Technical Committee in which by Annexure-5, the petitioner’s bid was found to be not qualified technically. The reason stated was that the certificate of the bank did not contain the date.

2. The petitioner admits that the certificate did not contain the date and produced Annexure-4 dated 7.9.2024, which is said to be in clarification of the earlier certificate issued. The disqualification was made on the allegation of violation of Clause 4.2 (g) of the Model Bidding Document (MBD). The Model Bidding Document has not been produced but as stated by the petitioner’s Counsel itself, it is for uploading the bank certificate showing the credit facilities. Admittedly, the certificate