LAXSAN ASSOCIATES Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M/s Laxsan Associates, a partnership firm, has filed this writ petition through its Managing Partner seeking to quash the Annexure-1 dtd. 6/10/2023, by which it has been communicated that its financial bid has not been considered as its performance relating to deployment of manpower in RTO offices earlier was not satisfactory and it has not deposited statutory dues in respect of manpower supplied.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case, in brief, is that opposite party no.3-Transport Commissioner, Odisha State Transport Authority invited public tender vide RFP Reference No.LTR No.LXVI-9/23-10547/TC dtd. 18/7/2023 for 'Selection of IT Service provider for executing driving license and registration certificate related services, etc. for office of the Transport Commissioner, Odisha and its sub-ordinate offices for a period of one year'. The mode of submission of proposals was physical. The last date of submission of proposals was 10/8/2023 and opening of technical proposals was 11/8/2023. It was mentioned that date and time of opening of the price proposals will be communicated later to the technically qualified bidders at e-mail ID provided by them. As regards method of selection, it was mentioned as 'Least Cost Method (L1 selection).

(3.) Mr. P.C. Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner, having satisfied the requirement of the RFP issued under Annexure-2, participated in the tender process and qualified in the technical evaluation. Thereafter, in the financial bid though it was L1 bidder, its financial bid was not accepted on the flimsy ground that its past performance relating to deployment of manpower in RTO offices was not satisfactory and it has not deposited statutory dues in respect of manpower supplied. It is further contended that while participating in the tender in pre bid meeting if the said question was raised, the petitioner could have clarified the position with regard to past performance relating to deployment of manpower in RTO offices. It is further contended that so far as clearance of statutory dues is concerned, the petitioner has cleared all the EPF and allied dues vide Annexure-5. When there are no statutory dues to be paid by the petitioner, the authority has misconstrued in issuing letter dtd. 6/10/2023 and rejecting the financial bid of the petitioner. It is further contended that since the letter dtd. 6/10/2023 under Annexure-1 has been issued without specifying with regard to violation of any condition of the tender, the same cannot be sustained in the eye of law. Thereby, the decision making process of the authority being arbitrary, unreasonable and contrary to the provisions of law, this Court can exercise power of judicial review to prevent arbitrariness and unreasonableness in the decision of the authority concerned. To substantiate his contentions, he has relied upon the judgments in Mohabir Auto Stores v. Indian Oil Corporation, AIR 1990 SC 1031 : (1990) 3 SCC 752; Reliance Energy Ltd. and Anr. v. Maharashtra State Road Development Corpn. Ltd. and Ors, (2007) 8 SCC 1; Adani Gas Limited v. Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board and Ors., (2020) 4 SCC 529; M/s. D.K. Engineering and Construction v. State of Odisha and Anr., 2016(II) ILR-CUT-515; M/s. Famous Security Services v. State of Odisha, AIR 2021 (Odisha) 57 and Mihan India Ltd. v. GMR Airports Ltd., AIR 2022 SC 2745.