- (1.) THE petitioners in this art.226 petition dated November 20, 2010 are seeking the following principal reliefs: 'a) Declaration to the effect that the selection process of the successful tender is vitiated by irregularity, favoritism, nepotism and thus is void and/or set aside; b) Declaration to the effect that process for selection of successful tenderer is bad and wholly illegal; c) A writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus do issue directing the concerned respondents, their men, agents and subordinates to process the tender documents afresh and in accordance with law; d) A writ in the nature of Prohibition do issue restraining the respondents Coal India Authorities and/or their subordinates from taking any action and/or further action pursuant to and in furtherance of letter of intent issued in favour of the alleged successful tenderer being the private respondent herein;' Northern Coalfields Limited (in short NCL) of P.O. Singrauli, Dist-Singrauli (MP) put a notice dated April 24, 2010 inviting sealed tenders in two parts (Part-I and Part-II) for the following job: 'Excavation of Over Burden of First Dig (Solid) by Hiring of Equipment such as Excavators, Tippers/Dumpers, Drills, Dozers, Graders and Water Sprinklers for Composite Work Consisting of Blast Hole Drilling, Excavation, Loading, Transportation of Broken Rocks/Soil/ Earth, Unloading/Dumping, Spreading, Dozing, Water Sprinnkling and Grading etc. by Mechanical Means as per Instruction of Engineer Incharge at specified places at AMLOHRI OCP of NCL.'
(2.) THE first petitioner, a consortium of one Stevin Rock L.L.C. of Ras Al Khaimah in the United Arab Emirates and the second petitioner, Reacon Engineers (India) Pvt. Ltd. of Kolkata, submitted its bid. Part-I (technical bid) of the bids were opened on June 3, 2010. According to cl.21.2 of the instructions to the bidders NCL was to evaluate the Part-I of the bids, choose the substantially responsive ones, inform the bidders fulfilling the requisite qualifying criteria and then to open the Part-II (price bid) of the bids of only the qualified bidders. On September 9, 2010 the first petitioner wrote a letter requesting NCL not to reject its technical bid on the grounds of 'certain missing/short documents' without first getting 'the SRRAK documents verified from respective Embassy.' On October 18, 2010 the price bids of the bidders whose technical bids had been found to be substantially responsive were opened and the name of the eighth respondent (Girija Pathi Reddy B Co.) was announced as the successful bidder. THE first petitioner wrote a letter dated October 22, 2010 stating and asking NCL as follows: "We have come to know on 21.10.2010 that you have announced the name of the successful bidders on 18.10.2010. Though our technical bid was perfect and as well we are eligible and our financial bid is lower than the organization to whom the contract has been awarded, yet our offer has been rejected without reason, without hearing. Infact after opening of the technical bid, you have not communicated with us till you have announced the name of the successful bidders on 18.10.2010 behind the back and surreptitiously. Your action is fully arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminatory and dehorse the principle of fair-play and natural justice. Please disclose us the reasons for not awarding the bid to us in terms of the provisions of the tender document forthwith." Under the circumstances, contending (in para.8) that the decision making process was 'faulty, unfair, unreasonable, arbitrary, discriminatory and dehors the principles of natural justice and fair play', the petitioners brought this petition. Counsel for the respondents have raised a preliminary objection that this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition, because Coal India Limited (in short CIL), the Superintending Engineer (E and M)/In-charge, NCL Desk Office and Allahabad Bank, J.L. Nehru Branch whose seats are in Kolkata have nothing to do with the reliefs sought in the petition or its cause of action, no part whereof has arisen within the territories in relation to which this Court exercises jurisdiction.
(3.) MR. Pal, counsel for the petitioners, has argued that this Court has jurisdiction on twofold basis: (i) parts of the cause of action have arisen within the territories in relation to which this Court exercises jurisdiction; and (ii) seat of CIL whose hundred per cent subsidiary is NCL is in Kolkata. As to parts of the cause of action, Mr Pal's submissions are these. Bank guarantee for bid security and solvency certificate for working capital were obtained from a Kolkata bank, which confirmed them when NCL officials visited it for verification. Situs of the fleet of equipment whose ownership evidence was produced is Kolkata. These all are related to essential eligibility criteria. Most importantly, after opening the technical bid NCL sent bid validity extension request to Kolkata wherefrom the petitioners, accepting the request, extended the bid validity period.;