- Court
- High Court of Uttarakhand
- Decided
- 7 November 2024
- Bench
- Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Vivek Bharti Sharma
- Case no.
- WPMB 525/2024
Follow Uttarakhand High CourtFollow Manoj Kumar TiwariFollow Vivek Bharti Sharma
Judgment
SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar 's or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
WPMB No. 525 of 2024
Hon 'ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, A.C.J. Hon 'ble Viv ek Bh ar t i Sh ar m a, J.
Ms. Menka Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioner.
¶2Mr. P.C. Bisht, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/ respondent no. 1.
¶3Mr. S.S. Chauhan, Advocate for respondent nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6.
¶4Petitioner is a Class-A Civil Contractor registered with Rural Engineering Service, Irrigation Department and Public Service Department of the State.
¶5By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs: -
(i) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the bid/ notice inviting tender dated 26.10.2024 having Tender ID 2024_CCUK_136938_1 floated by the respondent no.2 for work description : MRL03-Dasaithal Agron Pokhri To Chaulikhulet Chandikaghat Motor Road Upgradation, Length 10.576 Km. Phase-XVII as contained in Annexure No. I to the writ petition.
(ii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the decision dated 08.08.2024/ document whereby the petitioner was disqualified on the ground that "Methodology is not proper", contained in Annexure No. 4 to the Writ Petition.
(iii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the resolution dated 27.09.2024 whereby a decision was taken to revoke the tender disqualifying all
the bidders, to the extent it disqualifies the petitioner, contained in Annexure No. 7 to the Writ Petition.
(iv) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 and 3 to treat the petitioner as technically qualified and open the financial bid of the petitioner."
¶6From the pleadings made in the writ petition, it transpires that petitioner subm itted bid in response to Notice Inviting Tender, issued by respondent no. 2, on 02.03.2024 as amended vide corrigendum dated
16.03.2024. Petitioner's bid was declared to be technically non-responsive on the ground that methodology indicated by him in his technical bid was not found to be proper.
¶7Petitioner made representation against the said decision taken by Competent Authority declaring his technical bid to be non-responsive. His representation was rejected.
¶8Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 2 to 6 submits that four bids, in total, were received in response to the aforesaid Notice Inviting Tender, out of which two were found to be technically qualified and remaining two were declared as technically non-responsive. He further submits that petitioner filed objection against the two bidders, who were found to be technically responsive, questioning their eligibility. The objection submitted by petitioner, questioning eligibility of two bidders, who were
found to be technically responsive, was allowed and those two bidders were also declared to be technically non-responsive. Thus, there was not a single bidder, who was meeting the requirement of Notice Inviting Tender. Therefore, the Competent Authority decided to cancel the tender process initiated earlier, and fresh tenders were invited, vide notice dated
26.10.2024. Thus, he submits that the writ petition is without any cause of action and there is no illegality or infirm ity in the impugned Notice Inviting Tender, issued on 26.10.2024.
¶9We find substance in the said submission. Since the only four bidders had submitted bid in response to earlier Notice Inviting Tender and all the bidders are declared to be technically non-responsive, therefore, there is nothing wrong in the decision taken by Competent Authority to initiate fresh tender process.
¶10Thus, there is scope for interference in the matter. The writ petition fails and is dismissed.
( Viv ek Bh ar t i Sh ar m a, J.) ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, A.C.J.)
07.11.2024 Navin
NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da 82a131bb4e4403d3ctia15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643 AF56D653D095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2024.11.11 10:51:24 +05'30'
Source: High Court of Uttarakhand, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.