EDUCOMP SOLUTION LTD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been preferred for the following reliefs : - i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding upon the respondent Nos.2 and 3, to award the contract to the petitioner as he has been declared qualified and lowest bidder in pursuance of Tender No. JEPG/1575 dated 18-8-2008 as contained in Annexure-1. ii) For issuance of a writ/direction particularly a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing of Short Term Re-tender Notice vide tender No. ME/01/541 /2008/2960 dated 7-1-2009 (Annexure-4) by which the respondents have invited sealed Technical and commercial bids for implementation of Computer Education &. Computer Aided Education Project in nearly 248 Govt. Middle Schools in the State i.e. for the same and exact work for which earlier Tender No. JEPC/1676 dated 18-8-2008 as contained in Annexure-1 was published and in the said process the petitioner has qualified and declared lowest one, but the contract has not been awarded till date for the reasons best known to the respondents and subsequent re-tender for the same work smacks of mala fide and ulterior motive of the respondents on extraneous consideration. iii) For restraining the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 from proceeding further in light of short term re-tender notice dated 7-1-2009 published vide tender No. ME/01/541/2008/ 2960 dated 7-1-2009 (Annexure-4). The main contention raised by the Sr. counsel Sri Anil Kumar Sinha for the petitioner is that issuance of short term re-tender notice was illegal. It has also been contended that without cancelling earlier tender issued vide Annexure 1, the second short term re-tender notice was in violation of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and there was total non-application of mind and no reasoning has been assigned, It has also been contended that the petitioner was the lowest and successful bidder and thus, he is entitled to be awarded the contract.

(2.) According to the counsel for the respondents the tender notice was yet to be finalised since no decision was taken to allot the work to any particular tenderer and thus the petitioner has no right to get the work allotted in his favour. It has further been submitted that after the cancellation of aforesaid tender notice dated 18-8-2008 re-tender was made and the said re-tender is still in process and no final decision whatsoever has been taken in the said re-tender. It has also been contended that as per 23(a) of Clause 2 of the Bid document it is clearly specified as follows : -

(3.) According to respondents, the tender notice dated 18-8-2008 was not even finalized since no decision was taken to allot the work. It has also assigned the reasons for issuance of fresh short term re-tender notice which is quoted as under : "That tender notice No. JEPC/1575 dated 18-8-2008 was not finalized since no decision was taken to allot the work to any particular tenderer and the petitioner being the lowest tenderer does not have right to get the work allotted in his favour. During the process of finalization of the said tender, the respondent-authorities reviewed the entire project for which NIT No. 1575 dated 18-8-2008 was issued and then it was decided that ongoing education on computer education and computer aided education, the criteria for taking commercial valuation was not in consonance with the object of computer aided education in schools, and therefore, it needs improvisation of many aspects like monitoring and supervision with school information system. The aforesaid decision was taken in a Review Meeting held on 13-10-2008 in presence. of senior officials of Education Department and considering the urgency as well as need for improvisation, it was decided in the meeting to cancel the tender No. JEPC/1575 dated 18-8-2008."