SYED AKBAR PASHA Vs. TENDER EVALUATION COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the decision of respondents No.1 to 5 herein passed in its meeting dated 24.02.2014, rejecting the technical bid of the petitioner and thereby accepting and forwarding the technical bid of the respondent No.7 for approval in respect of the tender for "improvements to Manvi Cross to Gavigat via Aldas road from KM 1.00 to 2.20 and KM 3.40 to 10.00 in Manvi Taluka, Raichur District", as copy of which is at Annexure -E and etc.) 1. This writ petition is filed challenging the decision taken in the meeting dated 24.02.2014 presided by the Superintendent Engineer, Public Works, Ports and Inland Water Transport Department, Bellary Zone, Bellary regarding the tender submitted for improvements to a road from Manvi Cross to Gavigat via Aldal in Raichur District.

(2.) AS per the impugned resolution/decision, technical bid submitted by the petitioner has been rejected based on the Evaluation Report submitted by the Executive Engineer. The reason for the rejection of the technical bid is, petitioner had excess work in hand. The impugned resolution is passed on 24.02.2014. This was followed by communication addressed to the Chief Engineer, North Dharwad on 26.02.2014 vide Annexure R4 produced by the State Government along with the statement of objections forwarding the recommendations of the Committee after analyzing the bids of the remaining persons with regard to the work. Later on, the bid of the 7th respondent has been accepted and a contract was entered into as per Annexure -R5 - agreement dated 04.03.2014. Work order has been issued on the same day, as is evident from Ex -R6 and it is urged by respondent No.6 that he had carried on the work until the interim order was granted in the said case on 23.05.2014.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire proceeding initiated against the rejection of the technical bid itself is illegal, as the bid could not have been rejected on the ground that the petitioner had excess work in hand.