(1.) The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order of cancellation of tender dtd. 7/3/2024 floated by the 1st respondent for procurement of Sandranol perfumery item.
(2.) Facts, in brief, germane are as follows:-
(3.) There were four bidders to the procurement of Sandranol. On 30/1/2024 the technical bids were opened i.e., the first cover was opened and two people emerged technically eligible. One is the petitioner and the other is M/s Karnataka Aromas. The financial bid was yet to be opened, which comes to be opened at a later point in time and the petitioner emerges as the lowest bidder and was expecting to be awarded the contract in its favour. The contract was not executed by the Company in favour of the petitioner in terms of the notice inviting tender. But, a pre- negotiation meeting with the petitioner was called by the Company on 24/2/2024. A clarification was sought on the ground that the petitioner had not enclosed manufacturer's authorization letter which is said to be the mandate as per tender condition No.29. The petitioner requests for some time to get the certificate on 2/3/2024. Four days thereafter the tender itself is cancelled and the Company resolves to call for a fresh tender. It is then the petition is preferred on 11/3/2024. This Court directed maintenance of status quo during the pendency of the petition, which interim order is continued from time to time. The matter was heard with the consent of the learned counsel representing the parties.