VINAYAK LOGISTIC Vs. AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT SERVICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is seeking for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent to accept original consignment bearing Article No. EG564386563IN which contains original Demand Draft of Rs.50.00 lakhs and Demand Draft of Rs.25,000.00 and Technical bid of petitioner firm in respect of Tender ID 491694 for operation of Fully/ Custom Build Non AC CNG Midi Buses with Driver and Conductor, Own, Operate and Maintain basis through Gross Cost Contract for Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Services.

(2.) We have heard Shri K.G. Sukhwani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, perused the case papers. The respondent herein invited tenders for operation of Fully/Custom Build Non AC CNG Midi Buses with Driver and Conductor on the basis of Own, Operate and Maintain basis through Gross Cost Contract for Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Services. Petitioner after downloading the tender documents and after making pre-bid queries, is said to have made Online price bid on 24/12/2021 and submitted EMD Tender Fee and Technical Bid by 27/12/2021, which was the last date fixed by forwarding the same through Speed Post on 24/12/2021 and it is stated by petitioner that said postal article came to be misplaced at General Post Office, as admitted by the postal department vide their communication Annexure-'G' dtd. 1/1/2022 and as such, by opening of Technical Bid, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent and hence, he prays for suitable direction being issued to the respondent to accept the bid of the petitioner. The tender documents or the Bid Summary would clearly disclose the time frame within which the bidders were required to submit the documents, bids etc. The time schedule fixed for different acts to be done by the bidders are as under :-

(3.) As could be seen from the above time frame, the last date for online submission of price bid was fixed as 24/12/2021. The last date for physical submission of EMD, Tender Fee and Technical Bid had been fixed as 18:00 hours upto 27/12/2021. By forwarding the same, through Speed Post/R.P.A.D./Courier, it is no doubt true that the petitioner submitted Technical Bid by forwarding the same through Speed Post on 24/12/2021 by registering Speed Post under Article no. EG564386563IN from SPP Vadodara RMS Counter. The same has been received in the office of G.P.O., Ahmedabad as per communication dtd. 1/1/2022 addressed to the respondent herein, at 7:58 AM on 27/12/2021. It is also not in dispute that the said Article had been entrusted to Postman No. 8 at 10:04 A.M., on the same day i.e. on 27/12/2021, but on account of shortage of man power and heavy articles being there, it is said to have been misplaced at Ahmedabad G.P.O. The said communication would also disclose that after two days i.e. on 29/12/2021, the said Article was re-located and handed over to the Postman for delivery to Admin Office of Transport Manager Shree, AMTS, Jamalpur - 380 022 and same was delivered on 29/12/2021 by the postal department which has admitted its fault was due to their employee and as such, they have requested the respondent herein to accept the tender document. When the tender specifications clearly specify the last date for receiving Technical Bid as 27/12/2021 upto 18:00 hours and the Bid or the technical qualification bid was being opened on 28/12/2021 at 15:00 hours, it cannot be gainsaid that the Bid subsequently received ought to be opened, though Mr. Sukhwani learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that said Technical Bid which was to be opened on 28/12/2021 at 15:00 hours, was not opened and it was opened only on 28/1/2022, there would be no impediment according to him for the respondent also opening the Technical Bid of the petitioner, is an argument cannot be accepted for the simple reason that conditions stipulated in inviting tenders it is the tender inviting authority alone, which would be justified in modifying, varying the conditions to suit all the bidders and not excluding any one from such process. The Courts exercising the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not issue writs to the authorities by substituting its view to that of experts.