DALIP SINGH ADHIKARI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Chief Engineer, Uttarakhand Rural Road Agency, Dehradun issued a Notice Inviting Tender on 28/11/2019 for different road construction works, including the work of up-gradation of Binatoli-Kunjhali to Majkot Motor Road. As many as six bids were received pursuant to the said notice, including that of the petitioner.

(2.) A Procurement Evaluation Committee evaluated the bids and found four, out of six bids, to be non-responsive. Petitioner's bid was also found to be non-responsive. The bid accepting authority, namely, Chief Engineer, PMGSY, Kumaon Zone, Almora accepted recommendation of the said committee and result of the bid evaluation was uploaded on the website. The bid evaluation report of Procurement Evaluation Committee is on record as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The reason for rejecting petitioner's bid has been indicated in the said report, which is extracted below:-

(3.) Petitioner filed a complaint against rejection of his bid, in which, he contended that his bid has been wrongly rejected; in his bar chart, at item no. 5 WBM work has been mentioned, which includes GSB, G-1, G-2, G-3, however, his bid has been rejected only on the ground that G-1 is mentioned in the bar chart, which is not justified. Petitioner further contended in his complaint that a bid could have been rejected for not mentioning some item but under no circumstance, a bid could have been rejected for mentioning all items, which are used in construction of road. He further contended that while constructing road over marshy/muddy land, G-1 is used, therefore, all the items of GSB were indicated in the bar chart, thus, decision to reject petitioner's technical bid needs to be re-considered.