ROSEMERTA TECHNOLOGIES LTD. Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the process initiated by the State of Madhya Pradesh in the Transport Department for selection of vendors for implementation, upgradation and maintenance of various services, Delivery Systems on Build, Own, operate and transfer (BOOT) basis for the I.T. Services this petition has been filed. Petitioner Company is challenging the tender process initiated vide document Annexure P-1 dated 8.3.13 and subsequent corrigendum issued to the same on 25/3/2013. It is a case of the petitioner which is a Company incorporated in the year 2006 and registered under provisions of Companies Act, 1956, that the terms and conditions for selection of vendors for the purpose of implementation, upgradation for the service in question is tailor made to suit the existing vendor particularly respondent No. 3 and is a process which is unconstitutional and arbitrarily, devised to some how oust the competitors like petitioner. Contending that certain condition imposed in the tender document Annexure P -1 dated 8.3.2013 are violative of Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, this writ petition has been filed.

(2.) According to the petitioner company they are actively involved in developing solutions and providing management facility for the purpose of Smart Card preparation in the Transport Department for various State Government departments so also for the purposes of security purpose, maintenance of land records etc. It is stated that the company has established various software's and has requisite manpower and technical know-how for carrying out the work for which the tender was invited. It is stated that the Company has I.S.O. 9000 certificate which has been accredited due to its quality service. It is the case of the petitioner that the Government of Madhya Pradesh in the Transport Department initiated certain process for the purpose of selection of vendors for implementation, upgradation and maintenance of various services delivery systems on Build, Own, Operate and Transfer (BOOT) basis for the period of 5 years which was extended further for the period of 5 years.

(3.) It is stated that on 27/12/12 the Transport Commissioner issued the tender/proposal for the work in question. The petitioner made representation to the respondent raising objections with regard to certain conditions stipulated in this tender. It is said by the petitioner that taking note of the objections of the petitioner this tender process was cancelled without specifying any reasons but thereafter another advertisement/proposal, impugned in this writ petition was issued on 8/3/13 for the work in question. When the same was issued on 8/3/13 the petitioner made representation to the respondent No. 2 raising certain queries and made certain suggestions and highlighted certain points with regard to tender issued on 8/3/13 vide Annexure P -1. Representation in this regard is Annexure P-3. It is said that after this representation was submitted a corrigendum was issued vide P-2 on 26/3/13. Further queries and suggestions of the petitioner was not addressed to and instead the Government continued with the process of tender. The process of tender has been finalized and as certain conditions which were incorporated in the tender issued on 8.3.13 are said to be arbitrary, illegal and as their representations did not yield any result, the petitioner is said to have filed this writ petition. According to the petitioner various pre-qualifications criteria contemplated in Clause-7 of the tender document are unreasonable, arbitrary in nature and as they are tailor made to suit certain vendors and therefore challenge is made to the entire process on the ground that these conditions are unsustainable. Clause 7 of the pre-qualification which are assailed by the petitioner are sub-clauses 4, 6, 8, 9 and 11 and for the sake for convenience the same are reproduced herein under -