- (1.) A quantity of 1,15,600 kgs of steel scrap from the construction site of the first respondent, which is the agency responsible for the construction of the new High Court building at Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, was advertised for sale through a public auction. In the first round on 13 June, 2014, 10 bids were received. The highest bid was of a bidder by the name of Rohit Steel which had offered a rate of Rs. 40 per kg. The bid was awarded to Rohit Steel which was required to deposit a sum of Rs. 46.24 lacs. The successful bidder failed to deposit the amount by the extended date of 6 July, 2014 following which the bid was cancelled and the earnest money of Rs. 50,000/ - was forfeited. The Purchase Committee of the first respondent resolved to make, an offer to the second highest bidder at the same rate that was offered by the highest bidder and accordingly, a communication dated 7 July, 2014 was addressed to the second highest bidder. Since the second highest bidder also did not accept the offer at the rate of Rs. 40 per kg, the tender proceeding was cancelled. A second auction notice was published in the newspapers on 25 July, 2014 and bids were to be opened on 12 August, 2014. No bid was received. Consequently, the tender proceeding was cancelled.
(2.) ON 15 August, 2014, a fresh auction notice was published for which tenders were to be opened on 22 August, 2014. Bids were submitted by five firms, including the petitioner and the fifth respondent. The bids of two bidders, namely, the petitioner and the fifth respondent were found not to be eligible on the ground that they had not submitted copies of the TAN registration and the registration certificate of the service tax department. Three firms were found to be eligible of which the highest bid was of the fifth respondent, Akash Traders, in the amount of Rs. 26.50 per kg. The bid submitted by the fifth respondent was accepted and the fifth respondent was directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 30,63,400/ -.
(3.) THE petitioner has moved these proceedings to challenge the decision of the Purchase Committee to award the contract to the fifth respondent. When the petition came up initially before the Division Bench on 2 September 2014, a statement was made on behalf of the petitioner that though the petitioner had offered an amount of Rs. 28.20 per kg, the contract of scrap has been awarded to the fifth respondent who had offered Rs. 26.50 per kg and as of date, the petitioner was ready and willing to enhance the offer. The Division Bench having due regard to the rates quoted by the fifth respondent and as offered by the petitioner, suspended the auction proceedings till the next date of listing. A counter affidavit has been filed by the first respondent to which there was a rejoinder by the petitioner. The principal ground on which the petition has been opposed is that the petitioner was not an eligible bidder. The terms and conditions governing the auction sale required eligible bidders to furnish, inter alia, copies of the TAN registration. Besides, it was stated that the bidder should be registered with the Commercial Tax Department. Admittedly, the petitioner did not possess a TAN registration and the service tax number which also was required to be furnished under the terms and conditions governing the auction sale. Moreover, it has been submitted on behalf of the first respondent that the petitioner did not enclose a copy of the Income Tax clearance of the previous three years which was also a requisite condition. The relevant conditions of the auction notice have been annexed at Annexure CA -1 of the counter affidavit, which reads as follows: - - "A. Should have registered in Commercial Tax Department. B. Permanent Account Number - The Contractor should furnish copy of Permanent Account Number (PAN). C. TIN - The Contractor should furnish copy of TEN. D. TAN - The Contractor should furnish copy of TAN. E. Service Tax Number - The Contractor should furnish copy of service Tax No. F. Income Tax clearance - Enclose copy of Income Tax clearance of the last three years.";