- (1.)Both these writ petitions relate to a tender issued by respondent-State of Himachal Pradesh for procurement of goats for the financial year 2019-20. Petitioners in both the writ petitions participated in the tender process. Petitioner in CWP No. 4082 of 2029 was declared disqualified in the technical bid, hence he has assailed rejection of his technical bid and has also sought a direction to the respondents for not finalizing the tender of declared L-1 (respondent No. 3). Petitioner in CWP No. 4086 of 2019 qualified the technical bid, however, being L-2 in the financial bid, he also lost to L-1 respondent No. 4 therein. Petitioner challenges the eligibility of L-1 (respondent No. 4) for participating in the tender process. L-1 has been impleaded as respondent No. 3 in CWP No. 4082 of 2019 and as respondent No. 4 in CWP No. 4086 of 2019. For convenience, L-1 is being referred hereinafter as respondent No. 3.
(2.)Facts of the case may be noticed :-
(i) Respondent department of Animal Husbandry floated online tenders on 2.8.2019 for procurement of goats for the State of Himachal Pradesh for the year 2019-20. Only one bidder qualified the technical bid. Therefore, in view of Notification dated 24.1.2013 prescribing that number of bids received in the advertised tender shall not be less than minimum three, re-tendering were initiated. (ii) The tender was re-issued online on 4.9.2019, however, it was again cancelled by the Technical Committee in view of certain deliberations over the terms and conditions therein. (iii) Third time, online tender was issued on 24. 09. 2019 whereunder though seven bidders participated in the tender process, but only two of them were declared qualified as against requisite three number of bidders. (iv) The tender in question was issued fourth time on 14. 11. 2019 for procurement of goats for the State of Himachal Pradesh for the year 2019-20. Eight bidders participated in the tender process. Four bidders were declared successful by the Technical Sub Committee on 2.12.2019 including the petitioner in CWP No. 4086 of 2019 and M/s Jai Mata Ji Banwal (respondent No. 3). The financial bids of successful bidders were opened on 4.12.2019, wherein respondent No.3 emerged L-1. Aggrieved, these two writ petitions have been preferred.

(3.)Contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners may be noticed hereinafter.
3(i) Learned counsel for the petitioner in CWP No. 4082 of 2019 submitted that under the tender document (Annexure P-2), more particularly important information whereof, the bids could be submitted till 28.11.2019 by 5. 00 p. m. .The technical bids were to be opened on 29.11.2019 by 12.00 noon. Bids were submitted by the petitioner within the stipulated period. It is contended that the technical bids were opened by the respondents on 29.11.2019 and petitioner's technical bid was accepted on 29.11.2019 itself vide Annexure P-3, generated on 29. 11. 2019 at 12. 13 p. m. Whereas it has been rejected by the respondents on 4.12.2019 (Annexure P-4) on the ground being non- responsive. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that after accepting the technical bid of the petitioner on 29.11.2019, the same could not be rejected on 2.12.2019/04.12.2019.

;