SITAL ENTERPRISES Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENT No. 1 issued a Notice Inviting Tender (hereinafter referred to as 'the NIT') for supply of readymade School Uniforms, Shoes and Socks for Academic Session -2011 (Annexure -P2). The controversy in the present petition is confined to the supply of Shoes only. The notice contained various conditions for making the supply. Relevant conditions incorporated in it are reproduced hereunder: -

(2.) IN response to the aforesaid NIT, 15 firms purchased tender documents including the petitioner and respondent No. 2. Whereas only 13 firms submitted their tender documents within prescribed time. The Department had constituted a Committee consisting of following members for consideration of the Bids:

(3.) THE Committee of the officers accordingly opened the Bids received from 13 firms and prepared a comparative statement of the rates quoted by the bidders. It is relevant to note that as per the NIT, the prospective tenderers were required to quote the rates as per the design and quality of samples displayed in the HRD department and also in respect to samples that may be offered by the bidders. Thus, two kinds of rates were required to be quoted by the bidders for two different kinds of samples. Some of the bidders quoted rates as per the departmental sample, whereas some bidders also quoted rates for the samples tendered by them along with the tender document. The petitioner quoted rates for both the samples, whereas the respondent No. 2 quoted rates for only the sample kept by the department. It is relevant to note here that department had kept sample of BATA shoe. On preparing the comparative statement, the Committee found that the 3 firms including the petitioner and respondent No. 2 had quoted rates lower than the proposed rates. The rates quoted by the lowest 3 firms are as under: