UTTEJ RATHOUR Vs. STATE OF H. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since, both, CWP No. 1438 of 2020, and, CWP No.2433 of 2020, arise from a common thereto bidding document, hence embodied in Annexure P-1, thereupon, both the afore writ petitions are amenable for a common verdict being rendered thereon.

(2.) Through Annexure P-1, the respondents concerned, invited bids for works relating to "Up-gradation and M/T on Sainj Khad Dimmi Trahan Kupvi Road Km. 0/0 21/0 (SH:-ROFD i/c R/walls, cross drainage works, M/T works, Road side V-shape drain, essential parapets, solid cause way and sign boards and KM tone in Km. O/o to 21/0), under, NABARD RIDF-XXIV. The amount qua the afore works, as, encapsulated in Annexure P-1, is, in a sum of Rs.1235.13 lacs. Both, one Uttej Rathour (petitioner in CWP No. 1438 of 2020), and, one Yashwant Singh Diwan (petitioner in CWP No.2433 of 2020), participated in the tender process, and, after conclusion of the codal formalities, one Uttej Rathour was declared as L-1. However, the technical bid of Yashwant Singh Diwan became rejected. Moreover, through Annexure P-10, the respondents concerned, after rescinding, the earlier invitation(s) to make offers, as, elicited through Annexure P-1, from the bidders concerned, vis-a-vis, the works enumerated therein, hence, proceeded to seek, fresh bids from the bidders concerned, vis-a-vis, the work(s) borne in Annexure P-1. Consequently, both the afore writ petitioners, become respectively aggrieved, from, the issuance of Annexure P10, especially one Yashwant Singh Diwan become(s) aggrieved from rejection of his technical bid.

(3.) One Uttej Rathour, became declared, to be successful in both technical, and, financial bid(s), on anvil, of his, more especially, upon, his earlier work completion certificate borne in Annexure P-3, meteing absolute compliance, vis-a-vis, clause (28 (b), clause whereof becomes borne in the bidding document, inasmuch, as his earlier to offering his bid, vis-a-vis, the extant proposed works, his executing one similar work, not less than 40% of the estimated costs (without liquidated damage or compensation), for, the last five years, (i) however, one Yashwant Singh Diwan, had meted protests against the proposed ongoing contemplation(s), of, the respondents concerned to accept, both the technical, and, financial bid of one Uttej Rathour, (ii) complaint whereof, is, embodied in Annexure P-4, and, thereon the Executive Engineer, HPPWD, Chopal, after considering the echoings borne in Annexure P-3, and, also, upon, his making an interpretation thereon, of the afore clause, occurring in the bidding document, and, appertaining to similarity, of, earlier works done, hence made a decision, vis-a-vis, the compliant of one Yashwant Singh Diwan, not warranting any affirmative action thereon.