Delhi High Court: In the present petition filed under Article of the seeking to quash the entire bidding process dated 07-05-2024 and to direct the respondents to provide reasons for rejecting bids and to pass speaking order on the grounds for the disqualification, the Division Bench of Manmohan*, ACJ., and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J., held that the petitioner having participated in the impugned tender process was entitled to know the reasons for the disqualification of their bid.
The Court directed the respondents to pass a speaking order and communicate the same to the petitioner within two weeks.
In the instant case, the petitioner was a partnership firm, mainly providing manpower to various industries on contract basis. A tender was published by respondent 1 (Controller General of Defence Accounts) on the Government e-Marketplace (‘GeM’) Portal inviting bids for availing security workforce services. The tender was open for registration till 17-05-2024 at 11:00 AM and the bids were opened on the same day at 11:30AM. On 16-05-2024, the petitioner participated in tender by registering itself and filed all the relevant documents.
On 21-05-2024, the result of the technical evaluation of the bids was published on the GeM Portal. The petitioner further stated that total 237 companies submitted the bids for impugned tender, out of them 227 bids were disqualified with the identical remark ‘Not Evaluated’, and the petitioner’s bid was one of the companies whose bid was rejected.
On 22-05-2024, the petitioner addressed a detailed representation to the respondent 1-4 to seek reasons for its disqualification from the impugned tender. It was further stated by the petitioner that no reply had been received till date.
The counsel for respondent 1-4 and 6 stated that they were not aware in this regard and the remark of ‘Not Evaluated’ had been allotted by the operators of the GeM portals only and they don’t have any role in the petitioner’s disqualification.
The Court, after perusal of records and contention was of the opinion that, the tendering authority and the GeM portal were passing the buck and not addressing the queries raised by the petitioner. The Court stated that the petitioner had participated in the impugned tender process and was entitled to know the reasons for the disqualification of its bid and not providing these answers was contrary to the requirement of transparency.
The Court further directed the respondent 5-GeM Portal and respondent 1-4 to communicate to the petitioner the reasons for posting the remark ‘Not Evaluated’ against its bid. The respondents were directed to pass a speaking order and communicate the same to the petitioner within two weeks.
[JBMD Enterprises v. Sr Dy. CGDA AN, W.P.(C) 8410 of 2024, decided on 01-06-2024]
*Judgement Authored by: Acting Chief Justice Manmohan
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioner: A.K. Mishra with Sudhanshu Dwivedi, Reeta Vashist, Aman Kumar Thakur and Sumbul, Advocates.
For Respondents: Vikram Jetly, CGSC with Shreya Jetly, Advocate for R-1 to 4 and 6 and Akash (GP)
Buy Constitution of India
The post appeared first on .