BHARAT BIOTECH INTERNATIONAL LTD Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MAINLY , the petitioner challenges the cancellation of the tender as well as the retender notification issued as per Ext.P11. It is contended that the petitioner's financial bid was the lowest one pursuant to Ext.P1 notification and the attempt to have a retender is clearly malafide and is to deny the grant of contract to the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner company is engaged in the manufacture and supply of medicinal items under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. The tender herein is one concerning the supply of Rabies Vaccine. It is stated that the petitioner is one of the largest manufacturing companies having turn over of more than Rs. 100 crores for the last financial year and they have been supplying their products to more than 70 countries worldwide. They have world-class manufacturing facilities and have won various national awards, the details of which are given in para 4 of the writ petition.

(3.) IT is submitted that thereafter violating the procedures provided in the tender notification, the decision on selection of the supplier for Rabies Vaccine was referred to the Board of Directors by Ext.P5. Ext.P6 is the true copy of the Bid Ranking Status wherein with regard to Rabies Vaccine, referring to the complaints by all the bidders, the matter is left to the decision of the Board of Directors of the Corporation. Thereafter a notice was issued to the petitioner as per Ext.P7 to attend a hearing on the complaints which were submitted by the petitioner and the other tenderers, on 16.4.2012 in the Chamber of the Principal Secretary (Health), Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram by the sub committee of the Board of Directors. The petitioner's representative also attended the meeting. The discussion was on the route of administration, viz. "IM/ID". The petitioner's representative submitted that in the light of Ext.P3 amendment such a question does not arise. Later, Ext.P8 letter was issued to the petitioner to submit documentary proof (a letter or certificate) issued by the Drugs Controller General of India (for short DCGI) to the effect that the Rabies Vaccine offered by the petitioner can be used for both IM and ID route of administration valid as on the date of the tender. The petitioner submitted a reply as per Ext.P9 stating various aspects including that the clarification as per Ext.P8 is not required. It was pointed out that the same product cannot be administered for both purposes, Intra Muscular and Intra Dermal. It is the case of the petitioner that no vaccine is capable of both applications and therefore the clarification sought was unnecessary and it was done deliberately to disturb the tendering procedure and as a ground to cancel the tender.