Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a joint venture, challenged its disqualification from a tender for construction of a gated barrage in Akola, Maharashtra, with an estimated cost of Rs. 305.55 crores. The tender required bidders to have general experience in 'Manufacturing Fabrication, Erection, Commissioning & Testing of Barrage Gate and Other ancillary works' of at least 795 MT in any one financial year during the last five years. The petitioner submitted a work certificate dated April 14, 2022, from the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Construction Division No.3, Thatipudi Medium Irrigation Project, Anandapuram, certifying that it had completed 'Structural Steel for Gate Fabrication Work' of 1256.35 MT in 2021-22. The Tender Committee disqualified the petitioner on the ground that the certificate did not satisfy the required criteria. The petitioner argued that the certificate should be interpreted to include erection, commissioning, and testing. The respondents contended that the certificate only covered fabrication and not the other aspects. The court held that the certificate did not demonstrate experience in erection, commissioning, and testing of barrage gates, and the tender committee's evaluation was not arbitrary. The court dismissed the writ petition, noting that the work order had already been issued to another qualified bidder.
Headnote
A) Tender Law - Interpretation of Eligibility Criteria - General Experience Clause - The tender required bidders to demonstrate experience in 'Manufacturing Fabrication, Erection, Commissioning & Testing of Barrage Gate and Other ancillary works' of 795 MT. The petitioner submitted a certificate for 'Structural Steel for Gate Fabrication Work' of 1256.35 MT. The court held that the certificate did not satisfy the requirement as it did not cover erection, commissioning, and testing of barrage gates. The tender committee's evaluation was not arbitrary and was upheld. (Paras 12-13)
B) Judicial Review - Scope of Interference in Tender Matters - The court reiterated that the interpretation of tender conditions by the tendering authority is final unless arbitrary or perverse. The court declined to substitute its own interpretation, relying on Galaxy Transport Agencies v. New J.K. Roadways (2021) 16 SCC 808. (Paras 6-7, 14)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner's experience certificate for 'Structural Steel for Gate Fabrication Work' satisfies the tender condition requiring experience in 'Manufacturing Fabrication, Erection, Commissioning & Testing of Barrage Gate and Other ancillary works'.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The impugned communication dated September 28, 2024 disqualifying the petitioner's technical bid is upheld.
Law Points
- Tender evaluation
- interpretation of tender conditions
- judicial review of tender decisions
- eligibility criteria
- experience certificate
Case Details
2024 LawText (BOM) (10) 143
Writ Petition No. 6028/2024
Nitin W. Sambre, Mrs. Vrushali V. Joshi
Ms Apurva Tripathi, Shri D.A. Sonwane, Shri D.V. Chauhan, Shri N.S. Rao, Shri S.P. Dharmadhikari, Shri J.B. Kasat
M/S BCPL-SRRIPL (J.V.) Through Authorized Signatory Rajaram Sunil Kundu
State of Maharashtra & Others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging disqualification of technical bid in a public tender for construction of a gated barrage.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside the communication dated September 28, 2024 disqualifying its technical bid and sought direction to re-evaluate its claim based on the work certificate dated April 14, 2022.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was disqualified from the tender process on the ground that its experience certificate did not satisfy the required criteria for 'Manufacturing Fabrication, Erection, Commissioning & Testing of Barrage Gate and Other ancillary works'.
Previous Decisions
The Tender Committee consisting of five officers headed by the Chief Engineer recommended disqualification of the petitioner. The work order was issued to another qualified bidder on October 11, 2024.
Issues
Whether the petitioner's experience certificate for 'Structural Steel for Gate Fabrication Work' satisfies the tender condition requiring experience in 'Manufacturing Fabrication, Erection, Commissioning & Testing of Barrage Gate and Other ancillary works'.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the certificate for 'Structural Steel for Gate Fabrication Work' of 1256.35 MT should be interpreted to include erection, commissioning, and testing, and that the quantity exceeded the required 795 MT.
Respondents argued that the certificate only covered fabrication and not erection, commissioning, and testing, and that the tender committee's interpretation should be final unless arbitrary.
Ratio Decidendi
The tender committee's evaluation of the experience certificate is not arbitrary; the certificate for 'Structural Steel for Gate Fabrication Work' does not satisfy the requirement of 'Manufacturing Fabrication, Erection, Commissioning & Testing of Barrage Gate and Other ancillary works'. The court will not substitute its own interpretation of tender conditions unless the authority's interpretation is perverse or arbitrary.
Judgment Excerpts
Even if what has been stated in the information submitted by the petitioner is taken to be true at its face value, viz. Having successfully executed work in 2021-22 of 'Structural Steel for Gate Fabrication work' to the extent of 1256.35 MT, same is not satisfying the condition referred above as the certificate does not speak of the petitioner successfully completing 'Manufacturing Fabrication, Erection, Commissioning & Testing of Barrage Gate and Other ancillary works' to the tune of 795 MT.
Procedural History
The tender was floated by respondent nos.2 to 5 via E-Tender Notice No.07 of 2024-25. Technical bids were opened on September 23, 2024. The petitioner was disqualified on September 28, 2024. The petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging the disqualification. The work order was issued to another qualified bidder on October 11, 2024. The writ petition was heard and disposed of on October 14, 2024.
