UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE Vs. SURE SAFETY SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Union Of India, Through Secretary, Ministry Of Defence
Sure Safety Solutions Private Limited,
Click here to view full judgement.
Arup Kumar Goswami, J. -
(1.) Heard Mr. Maninder Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, assisted by Mr. Bala Subramaniam, learned Central Government counsel as well as Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, appearing for the applicants in the writ petition. Also heard Mr. D.K. Mishra, learned senior counsel for the opposite parties.
(2.) The applicant Nos.1 to 5 are arrayed as respondent Nos.1 to 5, respectively, in the writ petition and the opposite party Nos.1 & 2 are the writ petitioner Nos.1 & 2, respectively, in the writ petition. The parties will be referred to as referred to in the writ petition.
(3.) The writ petitioner No.1 is registered as a Micro, Small & Medium Enterprise (MSME) under the National Small Industries Corporation Limited (NSIC) and the writ petitioner No.2 is one of the Directors of the writ petitioner No.1. Pursuant to a Request For Proposal (RFP) dated 30.04.2016 inviting bids for procurement of 67 pieces of Quadcopter (Day/Night) Medium Range Equipment out of the Army Commanders Special Financial Power Fund for the year 2015-16, the petitioner No.1 had submitted its technical as well as commercial bids. Being successful in the techno-commercial bidding process, the respondent No.4, i.e. the Major General, Artillery, for the respondent No.3, i.e. the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Headquarters, Eastern Command, placed a supply order dated 27.12.2016 for 67 Quadcopters (Day/Night) Medium Range at ' 9,00,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs) per unit with a delivery period of 60(sixty) days from the effective date of supply order. On 15.03.2018, the respondent No.5, i.e. the Major General, General Staff (SD & WE) Branch, Headquarters, Eastern Command cancelled the supply order on the grounds that the petitioners committed breach of the supply order by failing to supply the entire quantity of Quadcopters in time and that the Quadcopters that were supplied had failed to meet the qualitative requirements stated in the supply order. On 16.03.2018, the respondent No.5 issued a notice requiring the petitioner No.1 to show cause by 30.03.2018 as to why the petitioner No.1 and its allied firms should not be suspended as, prima facie, the petitioner No.1 had misrepresented the capabilities of the Quadcopters to project the firm as technically qualified when the petitioner No.1 was not meeting the threshold eligibility.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.