JNTUK Vs. GLOBARENA TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Assailing the order dated 9.3.2019 passed by the Sole Arbitrator in a petition filed under Section 26 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the present Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed.

(2.) The respondent-claimant submits that the petitioner - JNTUK, Kakinada, intending to implement and facilitate the Centre of Excellence for e-Resource Development and Deployment Project facilitating e-learning programs, employability skill development and industry interfacing initiatives have floated a tender. The objective of JNTUK was to establish state of the art facility to achieve excellence in the course delivery mechanism, facilitation of single window industry strength programs and providing e-learning courseware for use by faculties and students in their classroom deliveries. In this regard the petitioner - JNTUK floated a request of proposals from prospective private organizations by publishing advertisements in leading national and regional newspapers dated 11.8.2012 under the caption "Establishing Center of Excellence for e Resource Development and Deployment" etc., It is said that partI of request for proposal comprises of invitation to bid (ITB), while part-II relates to instructions to bidders. Part-III relates to terms and conditions, while Part-IV deals with technical and functional specifications. The request was for global tender. The courseware should be made available through multiple delivery possibility i.e., on college LAN and/or through secured access online and/or through a studio setup. The claimant responded to the request for proposal and submitted its tender as stipulated in invitation to ITB dated 11.8.2012 on 27.8.2012. The same was evaluated by a committee constituted by JNTUK on 12.9.2012. The committee, in turn, submitted the claimant's tender outcome to MDC (Monitoring and Development Committee) constituted by Government of Andhra Pradesh and its members being Chairman, Principal Secretary Education, Commissioner Technical Education, JNTUK Vice Chancellor and JNTUK Registrar. The said body suggested for conducting pilot implementation of the same as proof of concept. The officials of the respondent as well as MDC organized pilot project in six college locations on 15th and 16th October, 2012 incurring huge expenditure. The claim of the claimant is that it has developed e-software as per the agreement entered into and the termination of the contract by the respondent illegally made them to approach the High Court for appointment of an Arbitrator.

(3.) Pursuant to a dispute between the parties, Hon'ble Sri Justice C.Y.Somayajulu was appointed as an Arbitrator by the High Court on 23.2.2018. The dispute before the Arbitrator was whether JNTUK, Kakinada was right in closing the contract by its letter dated 20.6.2015; not paying an amount of Rs.22,33,31,975/- towards claim No.1 in favour of the claimant; not paying Rs.18,44,99,264/- towards claim No.2; and not paying Rs.2,83,75,164/- towards claim No.3 etc.,