Hemant Gupta, J. - (1.) CHALLENGE in the present writ petition is to the Notice Inviting Tender (for short the 'NIT') dated 15.9.2011, inviting proposals for installations of High Security Registration Plates (for short the 'Plates') for motor vehicles in the State of Punjab.
(2.) EARLIER , the Transport Department, Government of Punjab invited tenders for installation of such Plates on 27.4.2011. The Petitioners along with eight others participated in the tender process on furnishing the earnest money of Rs. 25.00 lacs each. The project of Plates is to be implemented on build, own and operate basis. The bids were in two parts i.e. technical and financial. In pre -qualification evaluation of the tenderers, petitioners and M/s Hind Industries Limited were shortlisted. Subsequently, it was found that the samples of M/s Hind Industries Limited were incomplete as they have submitted only four samples of Plates instead of 32 samples as required under the NIT. Thus, the petitioner was the sole eligible candidate in the process of awarding the contract. But respondents have taken a decision to invite the fresh tenders on 15.9.2011, wherein the bids are to be submitted on or before October 7, 2011. It is the said tender process, which is impugned by the petitioners in the present writ petition. The petitioners have impugned the re -tender process inter alia on the following grounds: (i) that there was no condition in the NIT dated 27.4.2011 that in case of one valid eligible tenderer, the tender process will be scrapped and fresh process initiated; (ii) that even if the petitioner is the sole eligible tenderer, the process to invite the re -tender cannot be resorted to. Reliance is placed upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court reported as, 2009 (1) R.C. R. (Civil) 393, Bharat Hotels Ltd. New Delhi v. State of Haryana and another; (iii) that the respondents are estopped to re -tender the process having proceeded to continue with the technical evaluation after only two tenderers qualified the pre -qualification evaluation. Thus, having proceeded to technically evaluated tenders submitted by the petitioners, respondents cannot turn around to issue fresh tender notice; (iv) that in the order dated 12.8.2011, IA No. 13 of 2011 filed by the State of Kerala in the Supreme Court praying for certain directions including permission to reopen the fresh tenders was dismissed. In the subsequent order dated 30.8.2011, the request for extension of time, since the State has received the single tender was declined. Therefore, it is contended that Hon'ble Supreme Court has not prohibited the State Governments to finalize the tender process on the basis of the single tender; (v) that the process to re -tender will not serve the public interest. The direction of Hon'ble the Supreme Court to implement the project of installation of the Plates may not be complied within the time granted. Therefore, the State should have proceeded with the tender process initiated on 27.4.2011; and (vi) that there is no decision communicated to the petitioners that the tender process initiated on 27.4.2011 has been scrapped, therefore, without scrapping the earlier tender process, the respondents cannot initiate the fresh tender process.
(3.) WE do not find any merit in the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioners. As per the averments made by the petitioners, two firms qualified the pre -qualification technical evaluation and still further, one of the short listed tenderer could not satisfy the parameters at the technical evaluation stage. Thus, the petitioner is the only tenderer available for implementation of the project of Plates for the period of 10 years. It is but natural for the State to ensure that tenders are awarded after ensuring that there is enough competition so that the public interest is served for long period of time.;