GVPREL MEE Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHARA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Government of Andhra Pradesh decided to improve the irrigation facilities in the State and therefore, took up medium size projects. All these projects had to be completed within a period of five years. The Government also proposed to divide various works into convenient packages so as to invite tenders for Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) on turn key system including investigation, design, preparation of construction of projects, cost estimates, construction, maintenance and operation for one irrigation system. The Government also decided to take up the tender process in two stages. In the first stage it would empanel a specified number of special class civil contractors by inviting offers for pre-qualification to tender for the projects and in the second stage it proposed to invite tenders from empanelled concerns/firms/companies to take up water resources projects on EPC turn key basis. After the tenders were received, the bids had to be verified by high power committee appointed by the Government.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioner in WP No. 11391 of2005 (Appellant in WA No. 1360 of 2005) was that he was empanelled, he submitted his tender for packages 90, 91 and 98 and he was found to be lowest tenderer-L 1. However, the respondents were not entering into an agreement with him, therefore he sought a direction that the respondents may be directed to enter into an agreement with him with respect to packages 90, 91 and 98.

(3.) While disposing of the writ petition, the learned single Judge, ordered for fresh tender because he found the writ petitioner to be not eligible and he also found that if the works were allotted to the persons who had offered the next best rate, there would be sufficient loss to the Government exchequer with respect to packages 90, 91 and 98. The learned single Judge found that there would be a difference of Rs. 8,48,00,000/- between L1 (petitioner) and L2 and Rs. 62,23,00,000/- between L1 (petitioner) and L3 with respect to package 90, the difference between L1 (petitioner) L2 would be Rs. 7,20,00,000/- and Rs. 15,15,00,000/- between L1 (petitioner) and L3 in respect of package 91 and it would be Rs. 2,09,99,997/- between LI (petitioner) and L2 and Rs. 3,17,00,097/- between L1 (petitioner) and L3 in respect of package 98. The learned single Judge found that if the works of all these three packages were allotted to L2, the total difference would be Rs. 17,77,99,997/-, therefore he ordered for fresh tender.