TERACOM LTD Vs. SAGGI ELECTRIC COMPANY & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this writ appeal is to the judgment and order dated 14.9.2007 rendered by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (C) No. 190 (AP) of 2007 whereby the learned Single Judge has interfered with the decision dated 25.5.2007 in pursuance to the letter dated 23.5.2007, holding that the Bank guarantee furnished by the writ petitioner valid uptil 6.10.2007 which was in consonance with the requirements of Clause 22.1 of the Notice Inviting Tender (NIT, for short) as the said Bank guarantee was valid for seven calendar months from the date of opening of the bids, as the bids were opened on 27.2.2007 and the second opening of bids on 8.5.2007 was an exceptional circumstance where the authorities failed to take recourse of the procedure prescribed in Clause 23.2 of the NIT where the bidder could have been asked to give extension of the Bank guarantee, which was not permitted and therefore, directed the authorities to seek consent of the writ petitioner under Clause 23.2 of the NIT within a period of two weeks and if there is positive response, the authorities would carry out the process of evaluation as expeditiously as possible.

(2.) The factual back ground of the case in hand as projected by the parties revolved in a narrow compass, the details of which is summarised herein below in order to determine the lis between the parties. The Chief Engineer, Eastern Electrical Zone, Department of Power, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh issued an NIT for Rural Household Electrification under Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojna (a Central Govt scheme) for 56 packages including Seppa and Chayangtajo. The packages in this case relates to Seppa and Chayangtajo. The NIT was issued on 29.12.2006, fixing the last date of submission and opening on 31.1.2007, which, however, was extended to 23.2.2007. The tender was opened on 27.2.2007, however, the appellant was prevented from submitting his tender by using force. The appellant therefore represented before the authorities including the Deputy Commissioner. East Kameng District, Seppa. When no positive action was forthcoming from the authorities, the appellant preferred a writ petition before the learned Single Judge, Gauhati High Court, Itanagar Bench, being WP (C) No.87 (AP) of 2007.

(3.) The said writ petition was disposed of on 19.3.2007 directing the writ petitioner to take up the matter with the concerned authorities and in particular, Chief Engineer (Power), Eastern Electrical Zone, Department of Power for redressal of his grievance. Pursuant to the said order passed by the learned Single Judge, the Chief Engineer took up the matter on 3.4.2007 in presence of the parties and on consideration of the entire matter and with the consent of the parties vide speaking order dated 10.4.2007, directed to resubmit their tenders afresh without inviting new bidders, i.e. no new parties shall be eligible for participation in it and accordingly, a circular was issued on 16.4.2007 by the Executive Engineer (E), Seppa Electrical Division requesting to obtain fresh tender papers for packages Chayangtajo and Seppa fixing the date of submission of tenders on 8.5.2007, also fixing the same date for opening the tenders.