MAHENDRA BUILDCON Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner who is unsuccessful bidder in tender proceedings initiated by respondent No.3 has filed this writ petition with following reliefs :-

(2.) Facts of the case in nutshell are that, respondent No.3 had issued e-tender notification on 23.09.2020 bearing System Tender No.67972 for installation of electric poles and street lights on NH353 from Sheetali Nala to District Hospital Kharora, Mahasamund. Last date for submission of online bid was 14.10.2020 and last date for physical submission of envelope with earnest money and cost of tender document (cost of tender notification to be in demand draft and amount of earnest money to be in FDR) with stamp of Rs.100/- was till 15.10.2020. Petitioner submitted online bid on 13.10.2020 and sent relevant documents through speed post on the same day i.e. 13.10.2020. Envelope containing FDR, Demand Draft and stamp paper sent through speed post by petitioner did not reach in time due to which, bid of petitioner was rejected during Part-I evaluation i.e. techno-commercial evaluation. Upon concluding tender proceedings, three bidders were shortlisted, namely, (i) Alok Sodhi, Durg, (ii) Shri Niwas Construction, Mahasamund and (iii) M/s. Siddhartha Construction, Durg (respondent No.4 herein), among whom, only Alok Sodhi was having the electric license. Other two shortlisted bidders were not possessed with electric license issued by competent authority, hence, it was a case of single bidder. Respondent No.3 in view of order dated 28.01.2014 issued by Public Works Department ('PWD') ought not to have proceeded further with tender but have floated fresh tender notification by mentioning that bids were not opened because of single tenderer. In the tender document, there is a specific clause that work should be executed by the persons who possessed with valid and proper electric license issued by competent authority. Respondent No.4 is not having the valid electric license. The object of including very specific clause of work to be done by a person holding electric license is to ensure standard quality and safeguards. The respondent No.3 rejected the bid of petitioner only on the ground that envelope with relevant documents sent by the petitioner reached to the office of respondent No.3 with some delay. The petitioner has already sent relevant documents through speed post on 13.10.2020 and delay in reaching the envelope to the office of respondent No.3 is at the most an irregularity and not illegality at all.

(3.) The pleadings sought to be resisted by respondents No.1 to 3 by filing reply to writ petition pleading therein that tender proceedings have been concluded strictly in accordance with terms and conditions mentioned in tender document. The petitioner has submitted online bid on 13.10.2020 and as per his statement, he might have posted envelope with relevant documents but had not reached to the office of respondent No.3 till 15.10.2020. This fact has been clarified by the Sub Engineer, Municipal Council, Mahasamund vide letter dated 09.02.2021. In the tender proceedings, 8 bidders participated including the petitioner, out of which, three bidders have qualified in techno-commerical evaluation for opening of their price bids i.e. (i) Alok Sodhi, Durg, (ii) Shri Niwas Construction, Mahasamund and (iii) M/s. Siddhartha Construction, Durg (respondent No.4 herein). Before issuance of tender notification, proper approval has been taken from the competent authority by sending format of tender notification. The said format was approved by the Superintendent Engineer and only thereafter, Notice Inviting Tender ('NIT') was issued. The work of tender notification can be carried out by civil contractor with the conditions that it has to be done through a person having valid electric license issued by competent authority. This requirement has been specifically mentioned in tender notification in Clause 1.2. Upon considering tender documents submitted by eligible bidders, respondent No.4 has been found to be most suitable. The work order was issued on 25.11.2020. Agreement has been entered into between respondent No.3 and respondent No.4, in the agreement, there was a clause specifying that civil work to be done under the supervision of experienced and trained civil engineers and all the electrical works to be done under the supervision of experienced and trained electrical engineers. Certificate for engaging experienced and trained civil engineers and electrical engineers is to be submitted immediately after issuance of work order. Respondent No.4 has fulfilled the said requirements and work has already been commenced. The work is in its mids and likely to be completed within stipulated period. The petitioner who became unsuccessful upon rejection of his bid, is estopped to challenge the clauses of tender notification. The petitioner is not having locus standi to question the legality and propriety of awarding tender work to respondent No.4.