IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12215 of 2021 ======================================================

Gomati Infratech Proprietor Minnat Kumari through attorney Rajesh Kumar Jha, aged about 45 years, Male, S/o Chandra Shekhar Jha, R/o Siswar, P.S.- Phulparas, District- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Rural Works Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Secretary, Rural Works Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Engineer-in-Chief, Rural Works Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Chief Engineer- 3, Rural Works Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

5. The Superintending Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Darbhanga.

6. The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, OfÏce of Chief Engineer-3, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

7. The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Madhubani. ... ... Respondent/s =====================================

=

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Smt. Archana Meenakshee (GP 6)

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA)

Date : 28-03-2022 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the decision of the Technical Bid Committee dated 18.05.2021 whereby and where under notice inviting re-tender for construction of different roads under MMGSY has been cancelled. The petitioner has further prayed for opening its financial bid and awarding the contract in question to it.

2. The brief facts of the case are that a notice inviting re-tender i.e. RWD /MMGSY/19/ET/2020-21 was issued by the ofÏce of the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Work Division, Madhubani inviting tenders for construction of different roads including maintenance thereof.

3. The petitioner is stated to have participated in the NIT and submitted its bid. The petitioner was the single bidder with respect to the construction of road work mentioned at Serial No. 4, 5 and 6 of the NIT. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the technical bid of the petitioner was accepted and thereafter, the respondents were required to open its financial bid, however, the financial bid was never opened and instead a decision was taken to cancel the tender in view of Clause 16 of the NIT.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that no notice or information was given to the petitioner prior to cancellation of the tender in question, hence, the tender has been cancelled in an arbitrary manner, thus, the respondents are required to be directed to open the financial bid and award the tender in question to the petitioner firm.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the Respondent State has submitted that the Respondents had invited short notice inviting Re-tender i.e, RWD /MMGSY/19/ET/2020-21 for construction and maintenance of 9 roads as described in NIT under MMGSY Scheme. Thereafter, the process for accepting the bid was initiated and as far as the petitioner is concerned, it had submitted bids for construction of roads as mentioned at Serial No. 2, 4, 5 and 6 of the N.I.T., acknowledgment whereof was issued to the petitioner. Thereafter, the meeting of the Technical Bid Committee was convened on 18.05.2021 for the purposes of technical evaluation of the bid submitted by the bidders, however, during the course thereof it came to the notice of the Technical Bid Committee that the clause regarding submission of the character certificate by the bidders is missing in the NIT, which is mandatory in light of the departmental letter no. 489 dated 28.01.2021, hence, it was decided to cancel the tender as per Clause 16 of the NIT in order to avoid any dispute in execution of the tender. In such view of the matter, the tender itself was cancelled in the meeting held on 18.05.2021 and the fact re