N LOGANATHAN Vs. P ELANGO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE writ appeals are against the order in W.P.Nos.15644 to 15646 and 18044 of 2000 dated 3.1.2001 passed by the learned Judge whereby the learned single Judge has allowed the writ petitions.

(2.) THE necessary facts for the disposal of these cases are: Indian Oil Corporation, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation and the Bharat Petroleum Corporation invited tenders for transport of bulk LPG for two years from various sources to various bottling plants in the four regions vide tenders closing on 14th May, 1999 at 11.00 hours. A lot of tenderers along with the petitioners participated in the tender, which were accepted. THE grievance of the petitioners is that the contracts were awarded to respondents 10 to 14 in the writ petitions/ appellants in W.A.Nos.229 to 232 of 2001, who were not eligible to get the same, as they did not fulfil any of the conditions of the tender and were not owners of any truck. All the four petitioners filed separate writ petitions making all the oil companies and the respondents 10 to 14 as parties. THEir main contention is that despite the clear mentioning of the main condition for participating in tender that they should own the trucks, the respondents/ Corporations granted tenders to respondents 10 to 14 without there being any truck, and without particulars of any truck in their application, and therefore the action is illegal, and prayed for a direction to the respondent/ Corporations, not to award any tender without the tenderers satisfying the tender conditions.

(3.) AT the time of hearing the appeals, a common affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondents/ writ appellants in W.A. Nos.321 to 324 of 2001. It is stated that the tender was not for the purpose to hire any particular truck with a commitment of minimum number of days, mileage and number of trips. If the oil companies are prohibited from utilizing the trucks from those who agreed to provide trucks within the dates mentioned, then they were bound to use trucks offered at the cartel rate of Rs.1.57 per MT per KM thereby incurring an additional expenditure of Rs.1.5 crores. The preference clause for tenderers having licensed/ registered operational trucks implies that not only the persons having tank trucks ready but also those who did not have ready tank trucks as on the date of the submission of the tender were eligible to apply. Since the quantum of LPG required to be transported is unknown and fluctuating, no correct estimate of requirement can be made and the mentioning of 6,750 tanks in the tender document is of no significance and no firm commitment was given to take 6,750 tank trucks. Citing the various directions of the Union Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, it is submitted that on 15.2.1999, the Ministry intimated that the original plan of giving new connections to the new customers of 40 lakh per year would be modified and it would be 50 lakhs instead of 40 lakh for that particular year. On 11.6.1999, it was directed that 70 lakh customers would be enrolled for the year 1999-2000 as against the originally planned 40 lakhs modified to 50 lakhs. Again on 10.1.2000, it was intimated that the second cylinder would be released to 60 lakh customers as against 30 lakh customers. On 8.1.2001, it was further intimated by the Ministry that for the year 2001, 1.32 crores new customers would be enrolled. Thus, the requirement was totally unknown at the time of floating the tender. It is also submitted that there was no question of deprivation of the workload to any tender whose rate had been accepted and whose tank truck was in the que, and the work was distributed in a systematic and transparent manner so that one of the transporters was deprived or prejudiced. It is further submitted that no single person had been favoured, and acceptance of the rate quoted by these who did not own trucks could not be said to be illegal. While the persons owning trucks had formed themselves into a cartel and quoted a uniform rate of Rs.1.57 per MT/KM to defeat the basic purpose of the tender, there was no uniformity amongst those who did not possess trucks indicating that there was no cartel among them. By accepting the tenders from non-owners, not only the oil companies would benefit but it would ameliorate the S.C./S.T. category, which is not at the cost of the writ petitioners/ respondents.