REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

KEC INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Appellant

V/S

Western Railways Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

VASSILIADES VS. VASSILIADES [REFERRED TO]
GALAXY TRANSPORT AGENCIES VS. NEW J.K. ROADWAYS [REFERRED TO]
POOVERJEE B BHARUCHA VS. EXCISE COMMISSIONER AND THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER AJMER [REFERRED TO]
BARIUM CHEMICALS LIMITED VS. COMPANY LAW BOARD [REFERRED TO]
ROHTAS INDUSTRIES VS. S D AGARWAL [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. BHIM SEN WALAITI RAMT [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. HARINARAYAN JAISWAL [REFERRED TO]
GULAM MUSTAFA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. VIJAY BAHADUR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
RANJIT THAKUR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
CHARAN LAL SAHU RAKESH SHROUTI RAJKUMAR KESWANI NASRIN BI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
G B MAHAJAN VS. JALGAON MUNICIPAL COUNCIL [REFERRED TO]
PODDAR STEEL CORPORATION VS. GANESH ENGINEERING WORKS [REFERRED TO]
TATA CELLULAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ASIA FOUNDATION AND COMPANYNSTRUCTION LIMITED VS. TRAFALGAR HOUSE CONSTRUCTION INDIA LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. DINESH ENGINEERING CORPORATION [REFERRED TO]
ABL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED VS. EXPORT CREDIT GUARANTEE CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
KISAN SAHKARI CHINI MILLS LTD VS. VARDAN LINKERS [REFERRED TO]
MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. ASSOCIATION OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISH MANDAL VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
RATNAGIRI GAS & POWER PVT. LTD VS. RDS PROJECTS LTD [REFERRED TO]
U.P. AVAS EVAM VS. OM PRAKASH SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
AFCONS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. VS. NAGPUR METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD. & ANR. [REFERRED TO]
SILPPI CONSTRUCTIONS CONTRACTORS VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
UFLEX LTD VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL HIGH SPEED RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED VS. MONTECARLO LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. MEHAR DIN [REFERRED TO]
M/S. N.G. PROJECTS LIMITED VS. M/S. VINOD KUMAR JAIN [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, seeking the quashing of the process of re-opening of Financial Bids as indicated in communication dtd. 6/10/2022 pertaining to Request for Proposal for Bid/Package No. RTM-NRD-DyCE-C-EPC-02 dtd. 30/3/2022 [revised on 9/6/2022]. The writ petition further prays for directions to the Respondents to act in terms of the RFP and rely on the results of the Financial Bid which have already been declared, and therefore, declare the 'Selected Bidder'.

(2.) The facts, in brief, leading to the instant petition have been stated to be as under:

(3.) Mr. Jayant Mehta, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, submits that the reopening of the Financial Bid is grossly prejudicial to the interest of the Petitioner as well as the other bidders whose bid prices and inter-se ranks have already been disclosed. He states that Respondent No.1 has thrown the principles of fair play and transparency to the winds and is violating the provisions of the RFP. He draws the attention of this Court to Clause 1.2.7 and submits that the lowest bidder shall be the selected bidder, and in case the lowest bidder withdraws or is not selected for whatsoever reason except the reason mentioned in Clause 2/1/12 (e), the bidding process must be annulled and fresh bids must be invited. He also places reliance on Clause 3.3.3. Mr. Mehta submits that re-opening of bids, as has been done by Respondent No.1, is not envisaged by the RFP. Mr. Mehta states that Clause 3.3.3 (iv) of the Manual for Procurement of Works notes that technically non-compliant bidders should be returned unopened to the respective bidders.

Click here to view full judgment.

KEC INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Vs. WESTERN RAILWAYS

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address