CONSORTIUM OF M/S ACRE COKING AND REFRACTORY ENGINEERING CONSULTING CORPORATION Vs. RASHTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED (RINL)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two Writ Petitions are being disposed of by this common order as they arise out of the same cause of action.

(2.) The facts in the instant case are that a global tender was floated on 16.01.2014 for the work of 'Coal Chemical Plant including Chilled Water and MBC Treatment Plant' by the respondents. The respondent appointed a competent and credible Independent External Monitors (IEM) with the approval of the Central Vigilance Commission in order to scrutinize the tenders. The petitioner and four others submitted their tenders. The consortium of M/s. L & T Limited became the lowest tenderer and the petitioner became the next lowest tenderer. The documents of the lowest tenderer were verified and it was found that they were not substantiated as being original and it was found that the tender was vitiated due to great deal of ambiguity, lack of proper documentation and clarity. The IEM felt that in respect of Chinese documents there are gaps in language translation, communication, apprehension about the authenticity of documents submitted and it was found difficult to have proper and conclusive scrutiny. The documents submitted by the lowest tenderer were not backed up by verification through an established and reputed Chinese legal firm.

(3.) Coke Oven Battery 5 (COB-5) consists of 17 different packages including consultancy services. The total envisaged project cost is Rs.2858 Crores, out of which the estimated cost of the package under the said tender is Rs.523 Crores which is about 18.3% of the total project cost. The Coke Oven Battery main package was awarded in July 2015 with a completion period of 29 months. On the recommendation of the IEM and legal advice, the tender of the lowest tenderer was rejected. It was also noticed that the petitioner is also having a consortium partnership with one Chinese Company and in view of the problem in documentation it was also thought not to award the work to the next lowest tenderer, but to re-tender the work. Accordingly, the work of Coal Chemical Plant was re-tendered on 30.03.2016 and the petitioner also submitted it's tender. The tender of the petitioner was not processed further on account of their poor performance with the awarded/on going work i.e., Sinter Machine-1 Revamping and Upgradation and Phase-1 of Sinter Machine-2 Revamping and Upgradation.