UPKARAN PHARMACEUTICAL Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has moved this Court with following prayers:

(2.) Heard Shri K. Rohan, the learned counsel for the Petitioner, Shri C. Jayant K. Rao, the learned counsel representing for the Respondent-Medicine Corporation and Shri Gagan Tiwari, the learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State.

(3.) The Petitioner is stated as a Government accredited sole proprietorship concern, engaged in the business of manufacture of 'Ayurvedic Drugs'. Pursuant to Annexure-P/2 Tender dated 01. 06. 2019 floated by the Respondent-Corporation for supply of various medicines and such other items, the Petitioner also wanted to participate in the same and being qualified in all respects, submitted the bid in this regard with all the relevant testimonials in the prescribed manner. While so, the Petitioner was served with Annexure-P/10 dated 25. 10. 2019, pointing out that there was some mistake / inconsistency with regard to the facts and figures supplied by the Petitioner along with the Tender; insofar as the 'License Number' mentioned in the 'Manufacturing License' and the one mentioned in the 'GMP Certificate' were different. Copy of the License has been produced as Annexure-P/11 (page 125), where the 'License Number' shown is '25D/54/85', whereas in the 'GMP Certificate' produced as Annexure-P/11 (page 128) it is '25D/9/05'. It is only on pointing out the above discrepancy by the Respondent- Corporation that the Petitioner noted the difference in the number and immediately steps were taken before the Competent Authority, who issued the said License / Certificate to make necessary corrections. The grievance projected by the Petitioner was considered and the authority concerned realized the mistake occurred on their side and it was accordingly that a corrected certificate was issued as Annexure-P/11 dated 26. 10. 2019 (page 126), whereby the Number was corrected and affirmed as '25D/54/85'. Immediately, the said certificate was produced by the Petitioner before the Respondent-Corporation and sought to have the bid considered. But, the Respondent-Corporation expressed its disability stating that it is an 'e-Tender' and as such, only those documents which were already uploaded could be considered by the Corporation; which otherwise will be in violation of the notified terms. This made the Petitioner to approach this Court by filing writ petition with the prayers extracted above.