SANTILATA SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner questions acceptance of bid offered by opposite party No. 2 for supply of goods/equipments in respect of tender floated by the Chief Engineer, Hydrometry and Data Centre, Department of Water Resources, Bhubaneswar (opposite party No. 5) in respect of supply of equipments, namely, Bridge Out-Fits.

(2.) Factual position sans unnecessary details is as follows :Total number of the required equipments to be supplied in terms of the tender was 42. The work was styled as "Package No. H.P.5/98 (SW)". The tender floated was a national competitive bidding. Section II of the Bid Document related to "Instructions to Bidder". Clause 13 related to documents required to establish bidder's eligibility and qualifications. The source of the fund has been indicated in the quotation. It has been stated that the Government of India has received/applied for a Loan/Credit from the International Development Association/International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (in short, 'World Bank') in various currencies equivalent to US Dollars 142 Million towards the cost of the Hydrology Project. The documents comprising the Bid are described in Clause 9. Clause 13.3(b) is relevant for the purpose of this case. Same reads as follows :

(3.) According to the petitioner, the certificate required to be filed should be by an Engineer belonging to any Government State or Central Government and any certificate given by non-Government agency or officer is of no consequence. For this purpose reliance is placed on another tender notice where Note to Clause 5.7 reads as under :