A M DAVID Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge raised in these writ petitions is with regard to the award of work in respect of a tender invited for road transportation of bulk petroleum products from the BPCL Kochi Refinery for a period of five years. The petitioners are persons who had participated in the tender process. Their contention is that they had quoted for the work offering more than the minimum required five tank lorries. It is contended that going by the tender conditions, the minimum required number of lorries was five. The estimated requirement of tank lorries was given as 65 lorries having the capacity of 18 kl and above. The petitioner in W.P(C).No. 558 of 2017 had offered three owned lorries and three attached lorries. The petitioners in W.P(C).No. 512 of 2017, who claim to be Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSE) in terms of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSME Act, 2006) claim that they have all submitted tenders with five or more vehicles. Their contention is that only those bidders, who had offered seven or more vehicles, had been considered for the award of work both in the general quota as well as in the 20% quota set apart for MSE. They therefore seek directions to the respondents to consider the tender bids submitted by them also, since they have quoted with more than the minimum required number of vehicles.

(2.) A statement has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 in both the cases. It is contended that the estimated requirements in terms of the tender notification was for 65 tank lorries. It is stated that the petitioner in W.P(C).No. 558 of 2017 had applied under the general quota with three owned and three attached tank lorries. The tender conditions specifically provided that within each category (MSE general category, SC category, ST category etc.) the tank lorries offered are more than the required, then the eligible bidders are liable to be ranked in the order of priority as provided in sub-clause 10 of clause-C of the tender terms and conditions, which reads as under:

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent BPCL.