AMRIT RAJ CONSTRUCTION Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Before referring to the relief, which the petitioner, is seeking, in the present writ application, it is apt to briefly take note of the facts of the case.

(2.) A Notice Inviting Tender (..NIT.. for short) was issued vide No. ET/RWD-DBG1/STATE SCHEME-06/2021-22 for construction of High Level RCC Bridge across Bagmati river between Panchaya Ratanpur Ghat and Trimuhan Ghat by the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department. The petitioner had submitted his tender pursuant to the said notice. The petitioner's technical bid was found responsive initially. Subsequently, however, in a re-meeting of the Technical Bid Committee, held on 24/3/2022, based on a complaint filed by one of the unsuccessful bidders, the petitioner's technical bid was rejected on the ground of disqualification. The said rejection of technical bid by order dtd. 24/3/2022, is under challenge in the present writ application. Petitioner's technical bid was rejected with reference to Clause 4.8 of the Instructions To Bidders (ITB ..for brevity..) of the Standard Bidding Document (SBD for brevity). Clause 4.8 of the ITB reads as under:-

(3.) It is also the petitioner's case that soon after the said decision dtd. 24/3/2022 was issued, the petitioner had made a representation on 26/3/2022 against rejection of his technical bid. It is the petitioner's case that rejection of his technical bid is wholly arbitrary inasmuch as the petitioner was not given any opportunity of hearing before rejection of his technical bid which was earlier found responsive. It is also the petitioner's case that the petitioner was the sole bidder whose technical bid was found to be responsive out of six bidders. Rejection of technical bid of the petitioner, who was the sole bidder, whose technical bid was found to be responsive, was apparently to thwart the entire tender process itself and to deny the petitioner award of the Contract learned counsel contends