RAJINDER SINGH RANA Vs. STATE OF HP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the petitioner in this case is against letter dtd. 27/8/2018 (Annexure P-4), whereby the Executive Engineer, Hamirpur Division, HPPWD Hamirpur, informed the petitioner that after evaluation, his technical bid had been rejected due to work in hand being not countersigned by the Competent Authority. A reference is made to the General Rules and Directions No. 19 of Standard Bidding Document (SBD) (Annexure P-5).

(2.) Shorn of details, suffice to mention that the petitioner submitted his technical bid in response to online bids, for the construction of Government quarters for employees of HPPWD Division Hamirpur. The petitioner's technical bid, as stated above, was rejected allegedly for non-compliance of Clause-19 of Standard Bidding Document. The said Clause-19 reads as follows:

(3.) It may be seen that Clause-19 is in two parts, firstly, the prospective bidder is required to furnish details of works done in the past five years and, in the second part, such bidder is required to disclose the works in hand, namely, the works which have been allotted to him and are still in progress. We have no reason to doubt that in respect of both the sets of works, it was obligatory for the bidder to get the tables countersigned by the Engineer-in-Charge, not below the rank of an Executive Engineer or equivalent.