Advocates:
['THIGALE GIRISH K NAIK', 'COPY SERVED ON GP', '', 'G P', 'R/ SERVED']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 6725 OF 2016

M/s Arde Electricals, Engineers

& Contractors,

Registered Govt. Contractor

through its Proprietor

Sachin s/o Zumber Arde,

Age : 38 years, Occu. Business,

R/o Ujwal Complex,

Opp. Old S.T. Stand, Ahmednagar,

District Ahmednagar

PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra,

through Secretary,

Water Conservation Department,

Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32

2.

The Superintending Engineer,

Small Scale Irrigation

(Water Conservation),

Circle Nashik

3.

The Executive Engineer,

Small Scale Irrigation

(Water Conservation),

Division Ahmednagar

4.

M/s Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd.,

Jain Fields, National Highway No. 6,

Bambhori Tq. Dharangaon,

District Jalgaon – 425 001

RESPONDENTS

----

Mr. Girish K. Thigale (Naik), Advocate for

the Petitioner

Mr. S.B. Yawalkar, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 to 3

----

2

wp6725-2016

CORAM :

R.M. BORDE AND

SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 20^th DECEMBER, 2016

JUDGMENT (PER : SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.) :

Rule, returnable forthwith. With the consent

of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned A.G.P., heard finally.

2.

Respondent No. 3 – the Executive Engineer,

Small Scale Irrigation (Water Conservation), Division

Ahmednagar issued e-Tender Notice No. 6 of 2016-17,

inviting sealed online tenders from registered

contractors of appropriate class with Public Works

Department, Government of Maharashtra for the

strengthening work at Shri Sant Yadavbaba Water Shed

Area Recharge Scheme (Stage-II) Ralegansiddhi, Taluka

Parner, District Ahmednagar. As per condition No. 3.1

(G) of the tender document, for determining the minimum

bid capacity in case of joint venture partnership or a

partnership, yearly turnover to bid capacity and

quantities of main items executed of prime and

sub-contractors have to be added together. However, no

3

wp6725-2016

addition would be permitted for working out the minimum

cost of similar type of work executed. The term

“Experience of similar type of work” has been clarified

in condition No. 3.3.1 as under :-

“3.3.1

Experience of similar type of work

The contractor should have successfully

completed at least one similar type of work

i.e. construction of Pump house, Rising Main,

Delivery Chamber etc in a single work having

similar nature and complexity also having cost

not less than Rs. 235.00 lacs at price level of

2015-16, and having executed main item of works

3.3.2 during last five years. (The works should

have been commissioned and completed during

last five years i.e. 2014-15, 2013-14, 2012-13,

2011-12, 2010-11). A weightage of 10% compound

annually shall be given for equating the cost

of work of the year, previous to current year

2014-15.”

3.

According to the learned counsel for the

petitioner, the above referred terms provide that the

capacity of joint venture partners collectively has to

be considered while evaluating the tender submitted by

them. He submits that the petitioner is a joint venture

4

wp6725-2016

comprising of M/s Arde Electricals and Sanket

Enterprises. They have executed a Joint Venture

Agreement on 15^th June, 2016. As per condition 3.3.1 of

the tender document, the value of the work of similar

nature completed by both the members of the petitioner –

joint venture was required to be considered which was to

the tune of Rs. 4,68,62,588/-, i.e. double of the

prescribed minimum that has been contained in condition

3.3.1 i.e. Rs. 2,35,00,000/-. However, while evaluating

the post-qualification of the petitioner, respondent No.

3 showed the work experience value of M/s Arde

Electricals only for Rs. 59,16,000/- and did not

consider the work experience value of the other member

of the joint venture namely Sanket Enterprises. The

learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

respondent No.3 misread the ab