CHANDRAKANT JAYANTILAL Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a registered firm and engaged in the business of weighing scales assails the award of contract for supply of 21977 sets of weighing scales for World Bank aided ICDS Project to opposite party No. 4, inter alia, on the ground that opposite party No. 4 who was not eligible for giving the offer was allowed to give the offer and was given the contract and also on the ground that the decision of the Procurement Committee while evaluating the bids became vitiated by taking into consideration the payment of sales tax on the supply in question, even though it was prohibited for being considered under Cl. 25.2 of a set of instructions called 'Instructions to Bidders' annexed as Annexure-3.

(2.) The Government of India had received a credit from the Inter National Development Association of the World Bank to the extent of 106 million U.S. Dollars towards the cost of the World Bank assisted ICDS Projects and intended to apply part of the same for purchase of weighing scales in Orissa. The Secretary to the Government of Orissa in Panchayat Raj Department, issued an advertisement in the Daily 'Samaj' dated 28-9-1992 inviting tender from the eligible bidders for supply of weighing scales numbering 21977 sets and in response to the said advertisement the petitioner purchased a complete set of bidding documents from the Director of Social Welfare, opposite party No. 2. It is alleged in the writ application that after fulfilling all the required formalities, the petitioner participated in the bid by submitting a sealed tender addressed to the opposite party No. 2 and opposite party No. 4 was also a participant in the said bid. In all, offer from 11 bidders had been obtained. The tenders were opened in presence of all the parties or their authorised representatives on 20-10-1992 and the partners of the petitioner's firm could know that the rates quoted by their firm are the lowest and the quality of goods offered by them were the best. It was also alleged that the petitioner's firm was the only bidder who was offered a list of after-sale service centres in the State of Orissa along with the tender papers which was the mandatory requirement under the 'Instructions to Bidders.' Though more than a year elapsed after the opening of the tender, but no decision was communicated to the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner submitted a representative of opposite party No. 1 and enquired about the contract, but still the petitioner was not favoured with any reply. Then petitioner somehow could learn that opposite party No. 1 has decided to award the contract for the supply of weighing scales to opposite party No.4 and accordingly he moved this Court by filing a writ petition on 21-12-93 challenging the award of contract in favour of opposite party No. 4, on several grounds including the ground that by taking into account the sales tax payable on the set the evaluation made by the Committee got vitiated and consequently the final approval and award of contract was vitiated. On 23-121993, this Court had passed an interim order staying the execution of the contract until further orders.

(3.) Opposite parties 1 and 2 filed a return in this Court stating therein that the contract has been awarded to opposite party No. 4 in accordance with the terms and conditions of the bidding documents and after due evaluation of the bids by a Committee under the Chairmanship of the Commissioner-cum Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department and said evaluation as well as the decision of the Committee in favour of opposite party No. 4 was approved by the World Bank Authorities. Several allegations made in the writ application with regard to the ineligibility of opposite party No. 4 to participate in the bid were denied. It was, however conceded in the counter-affidavit that after establishing responsiveness of the bidders comparison on the rates of different bids was taken up taking into consideration of the unit price tax, transportation, packing and forwarding and insurance charges. It was also stated in the counter-affidavit that the detailed evaluation and comparison of the bids made by the Committee was approved by the Government of India and the World Bank and then orders were placed with opposite party No. 4 for supply of the material in question. The further stand taken in the counter-affidavit that non-impleading the World rBank is fatal to the writ petition.