PIONEER CARBIDE PVT. LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner company by way of this instant writ application challenges the Risk Purchase Notice dtd. 1/5/2021, whereby the respondents had directed the petitioner to dispatch 1000 metric tonnes of Ferro Silicon, failing which the material would be procured from an alternate source at the risk and cost of the petitioner company and that any extra amount incurred in procurement of the material from other sources, were to be recovered from the petitioner company. This it is contended, is inspite of the petitioners' company non acceptance of the impugned Purchase Order No. 4140071156 dtd. 21/1/2021 (hereinafter referred to as PO for the sake of brevity) issued by the respondents, which was followed by issuance of a pre-emptory notice dtd. 7/4/2021 for breach of contract. The challenge so put up, is on the ground of arbitrariness, illegality and lack of transparency and fair practice in the tender process.

(2.) The brief facts of the case is that, in response to a Request For Quotation (RFQ) dtd. 26/10/2020, for supply of 1600 metric tonnes of Ferro Silicon to Bhilai Steel Plant, Chhattisgarh, the petitioner company had submitted a bid for supply of 1000 MT, along with techno commercial bid documents and was informed on 6/1/2021, that it had been shortlisted by the respondents to participate in the online option for procurement of the Ferro Silicon. After the conclusion of the tender process, the respondents then issued the impugned Purchase Order (PO) dtd. 21/1/2020, calling upon the petitioner company to supply 1000 MT of Ferro Silicon. The petitioner then by email dtd. 25/1/2021, communicated their non-acceptance of the PO for supply of Ferro Silicon citing various reasons especially the current price of the material and also cited irregularities in the process adopted by the respondents. Thereafter, there were several correspondences between the respondents and the petitioner and repeated demands were raised for dispatch of the Ferro Silicon by the respondents, which on the non-supply by the petitioner company, culminated in the Risk Purchase Notice, wherein it was stated that unless the consignment was dispatched immediately as per the PO, it would be taken that the petitioner company did not intend to supply and that the same would be procured alternately (Risk Purchase Action) and consequently the extra cost incurred in the said procurement was to be recovered from the petitioner company.

(3.) Alleging that the action of the respondents to be unfair and arbitrary, the writ petitioner has prayed for appropriate orders and directions to not give effect to the Risk Purchase Notice dtd. 1/5/2021 and for quashing of the Purchase Order dtd. 21/1/2021 as also the Risk Purchase Notice dtd. 1/5/2021.