BRAHM RISHI SHEWA MUNCH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein has challenged the notice inviting tender (NIT) dated 02.08.2016 issued under the signature of Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Bokaro (respondent no. 6) on the ground that the said NIT contains a condition that only those companies, which are registered under the provisions of the Companies Act can apply for the tender.

(2.) The factual background of the case as stated in the writ petition is that earlier also, a notice inviting tender was published on the website on 005.2016 under the signature of respondent no. 6 for supply of para medical staffs, security guards, sweepers and for other related purposes at different health institutions like Sadar Hospital, Diagnostics Center, Blood Bank, District T.B Center, Community Health Centers, Primary Health Centers etc. within the District of Bokaro through outsourcing which contained a condition that the bidders have to file the license showing registration with the Labour Department, Government of Jharkhand. The petitioner participated in the said tender, however his bid was cancelled due to non-submission of the license. Subsequently, the earlier NIT dated 02.05.2016 was cancelled and a fresh NIT dated 02.08.2016 has been issued for the same work however with a condition that only those companies which are registered under the Companies Act can apply for the tender.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the condition contained in NIT dated 02.08.2016 is arbitrary as the petitioner being the society registered under the Society Registration Act, 1860 has been prevented from participating in the tender. It is further submitted that the present condition has been laid down just to put favour to some bidders and in order to deprive the bonafide organisations like the petitioner. The petitioner wrote letter to the Labour Superintendent, Bokaro enquiring about the legal requirements for inviting tender as the same was not in conformity with the provisions of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (in short "the Act, 1970") and the Bihar (now Jharkhand) Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Rules, 1972 (in short "the Rules, 1972") and was issued only with a view to provide benefit to the private companies, which is illegal and arbitrary. It is also submitted that the action of the respondents reflects unfair and corrupt practises by putting the unreasonable condition in the impugned tender.