H M CONSTRUCTION Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is a Super Class Contractor, has filed this writ petition questioning the decision of the State Government rejecting the technical bid as well as the tender call notice bid identification No.CCE -UKP -03(3)/2011 -12 and alleging that the said decision is improper, oblique and with an alien purpose to prevent it from effectively participating in the tender process urging various facts and legal contentions.

(2.) OPPOSITE party no.2 invited bids for four items of works in bid identification No. CCE -UKP -03(3)/2011 -12 pursuant to letter no. 1435 dated 26.3.2010 (Annexure -1). Out of the said four works, item no.1 relates to excavation work including construction of a road work, item no.2 is for construction of a road work and item nos.3 and 4 are excavation work including construction of structures. Since the nature of works are different from each other and separate invitation for each item has been made, the petitioner and one M/s.Ratna Infrastructure Project Pvt. Ltd. submitted their bids, both technical and financial along with all the documents within the time stipulated in the tender notice submitted its tender in respect of item no.3, i.e., Excavation of Telengeri Main Canal from R.D. 6480m to 7650m, including construction of four nos. of structures of EMIP, whose approximate estimate value was Rs.792.50 lakhs. The bids were opened on 5.5.2012 and the same were placed before the Project Level Technical Committee. On scrutiny by the Project Level Technical Committee, it was found that the petitioner satisfied all the conditions of the bid identification notification and, as such, the Technical Committee accepted the technical bid of the petitioner and decided to obtain approval from the Government. But so far as the technical bid of M/s.Ratna Infrastructure Project Pvt. Ltd. is concerned, the Technical Committee found that the original EMD and Demand Draft towards the tender paper cost produced by the said firm did not match with the EMD and paper cost off loaded by him in web -site. Therefore, the bid of M/s.Ratna Infrastructure Project Pvt. Ltd. was considered as nonresponsive. However, the opposite party no.2 in his letter no. 2341 dated 26.5.2012 (Annexure -5) submitted the bid document of eprocurement of the work in item no.3 to the State Government for its decision. In the said letter it was specifically suggested to the State Government to approve the technical bid of the petitioner.

(3.) XXX XXX XXX