Alok Sharma, J. - (1.) Under challenge is the order dated 14.12.2015, passed by the Principal Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Jaipur in second appeal under the Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Act, 2012 (hereinafter "the Act of 2012") holding that the respondent No. 3 - -M/s. P.C. Snehal Tantia (JV) was technically responsive as per the terms and conditions of the bid document relating to the E -tender for procurement of the works of providing, laying, joining, testing and commissioning of sewer system and all ancillary works alongwith design, construction, supply, installation, testing and commissioning (civil, mechanical, electrical and other necessary works) based on SBR process inclusive of provision for treated waste water reuse including one year defect liability and thereafter 10 years O&M for towns under packages mentioned in the table of the Notice Inviting Bids (NIB) under NIB/4/15 -16 (hereinafter "the works"). (In issue was package No. 1 for Chirawa and Nawalgarh).
(2.) Relevant facts of the case are that the petitioner -Company as a joint venture (JV) of Technocraft Construction Pvt. Ltd. and Woodhill Infrastructure Ltd. submitted a bid for package Nos. 1 & 3 of the works aforesaid. Respondent No. 3 as a joint venture with Tantia Construction Ltd., amongst other, also submitted its bid. The technical bids of the petitioner -Company and the respondent No. 3 were both declared responsive on 06.11.2015. Thereafter, on the same day the financial bid of respondent No. 3 for both packages was found L -1. The petitioner -Company was as L -2.
(3.) Having lost out to the respondent No. 3, the petitioner -Company set up a case by way of two first appeals under Sec. 38(1) of the Act of 2012 stating that the documents with annexures pertaining to the bidding process as available on the e -portal of the Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Finance and Development Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter "Procuring Entity") indicated that the respondent No. 3 did not satisfy the financial resources criteria warranted under NIB, consequent to which being technically unresponsive neither its financial bid could be considered not it declared successful as L -1 qua the two packages in issue.;