ANUSUYA PRASAD NAUTIYAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, in the present case, vide order dtd. 8/8/2023, when notice of motion was issued, this Court had observed that petitioner has preferred this writ petition to assail Clause 17 of the NIT, and Clauses 4.2(c) and 4.4A(b) of the Standard Bid Document, on the ground that the same is in contravention of Office Memorandums dtd. 10/3/2016 and 25/7/2016, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises.

(2.) After notice, a counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent No. 3. In paragraph 16 of their counter affidavit, the respondent has stated that the MSME Act, 2006, as per para 4 of the Policy Circular No. 1(1)(2)/2016/MA dtd. 10/3/2016, it has clarified that all Central Ministries/Departments/Central Public Sector Undertakings "may" relax condition of prior turnover and prior experience with respect to Micro and Small Enterprises in all public procurement subject to meeting of "Quality and Technical Specification".

(3.) It is further stated that there is no provision for any kind of exemption to the tenderers under MSME in the SBD prescribed for tenders under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojna. The technical evaluation is done by the department as per the prevalent SBD for the said scheme and the petitioner cannot be given any relaxation in tenders of road construction. The work related to construction of motor road is carried out by the URRDA organization which requires expertise related to construction of motor roads. The MSME Act is related to the procurement of goods and services, therefore, this work is not covered by the said Act.