RITESH KUMAR AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cancellation of the tender floated for some civil construction works after identifying the technically qualified bidders including the Petitioner, is subjected to challenge, contending that it is highly arbitrary and without any reason as discernible from Annexure P/1 impugned in the writ petition. It is also contended that the 5th Respondent, who has issued Annexure P/1 is not having the power or competence to have cancelled the tender, it being beyond the financial capacity of the Executive Engineer as per the relevant norms/guidelines issued in this regard.

(2.) Heard Shri Apoorva Tripathi, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner as well as Shri Gagan Tiwari, the learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State/Respondents.

(3.) Coming to the sequence of events, an online tender notification was issued on 24.01.2020 for the lining and construction work of Shyam Ghunghutta Project with an estimated probable amount of contract stipulated as Rs. 23.55 Crores (approximate). The Petitioner being qualified in all respects as per the norms, submitted the bids in the prescribed manner i.e. Envelope 'A' (containing the details of registration under the Unified Registration System applicable to the State, EMD and the affidavit), Envelope 'B' (consisting of the Technical Bid with supported documents) and Envelope 'C' (consisting of the Price Bid). According to the Petitioner, the Respondents had issued two corrigendum and the last date for submitting the bid was extended to be in conformity with the modifications. On opening the Envelopes 'A' and 'B', it was found that necessary requirements were satisfied by the Petitioner and accordingly, he was declared as technically qualified. The price bid was to be opened on 18.03.2020, which came to be adjourned to the next date. However, to the utter shock and surprise of the Petitioner, he was informed that the entire tender proceedings were cancelled as per Annexure P/1 dated 19.03.2020 issued by the 5th Respondent, absolutely stating no reasons but for mentioning that it was under "some unavoidable circumstances". This, according to the Petitioner is highly arbitrary and illegal in all respects and is only with intent to extend undue favours to somebody behind the curtain, who could not participate in the tender which made the Petitioner to have it challenged by filing the writ petition.