THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT APPEAL No.772 of 2022
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. C.V.Mohan Reddy, learned Senior Counsel
representing Mr. N.Naveen Kumar, learned counsel for the
appellants. We have also heard Mr. L.Aravind Reddy,
learned counsel for respondent No.1/writ petitioner;
Mr. A.Sanjeev Kumar, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondents No.2, 4 and 5; and Mr. A.Yadava Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 16.11.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.40368 of 2022 filed by respondent No.1/writ petitioner.
3. The related writ petition was filed by respondent No.1 assailing its disqualification from the tender proceedings dated 03.10.2022. I.A.No.1 of 2022 was filed to stay all further proceedings.
2
4. We may mention that two notices inviting tenders (NIT) were issued by Telangana State Education & Welfare Infrastructure Development Corporation (briefly, 'the Corporation' hereinafter) on 03.10.2022 for e-procurement of furniture items for teaching staff as well as for laboratories and libraries. Respondent No.1 submitted its bid online on 12.10.2022. By the aforesaid NITs it was mentioned that the tenders would be of two bid system; the technical bids would be evaluated first and thereafter financial bids of the technically qualified bidders would be evaluated. On 21.10.2022 respondent No.1 received automated message that its tender was rejected on the ground of deviation. This led to filing of the related writ petition.
5. At this stage we may mention that respondent No.1 itself had filed an interlocutory application, being I.A.No.2 of 2022, seeking impleadment of appellants as respondents in the writ proceedings as it transpired that after disqualification of respondent No.1, appellants were declared as lowest tenderers. Without taking a decision on 3 I.A.No.2 of 2022, learned Single Judge opined that disqualifying respondent No.1 from the tender appeared to be arbitrary and without any rationale basis. Accordingly, order dated 16.11.2022 was passed directing that all further proceedings pursuant to the two NITs both dated 03.10.2022 shall remain stayed.
6. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants submits that respondent No.1 was disqualified from NIT dated 22.09.2022 by the same Corporation on the ground of having conflict of interest. This is under challenge by respondent No.1 in W.P.No.40402 of 2022. In I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.40402 of 2022 filed by respondent No.1 for stay, learned Single Judge declined to grant any stay and dismissed I.A.No.1 of 2022. According to learned Senior Counsel, such decision of learned Single Judge would have a definite bearing on the technical eligibility of respondent No.1 in the present tender process. Had I.A.No.2 of 2022 in W.P.No.40368 of 2022 been allowed and appellants been brought on record, this aspect could have been brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge by the appellants. 4
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that it is only an interim order passed by the learned Single Judge. Learned Single Judge had examined the reasons given by the Corporation for disqualifying respondent No.1, whereafter a clear finding was rendered by the learned Single Judge to the effect that there being a conflict of interest cannot be a ground for disqualification in subsequent tender. He, therefore, submits that there is no error or infirmity in the view taken by the learned Single Judge to maintain an intra-court appeal.
8. Learned counsel for the Corporation, on the other hand, justified disqualification of respondent No.1 and also relies upon the order of the learned Single Judge dated 16.11.2022 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.40402 of 2022.
9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on due consideration, we are of the view that it would be just and proper if I.A.No.2 of 2022 is considered by the learned Single Judge before hearing I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.40368 of 2022 afresh. Respondent No.1 having 5 filed I.A.No.2 of 2022 to bring the lowest tenderers on record ought to have taken steps for hearing I.A.No.2 of 2022 first before proceeding with I.A.No.1 of 2022.
10. Without expressing any opinion on merit as well as on the stay prayer of respondent No.1, we set aside the order dated 16.11.2022 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.40368 of 2022 and remand the matter back to the learned Single Judge to hear I.A.No.2 of 2022 and I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.40368 of 2022 together and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.
11. Writ appeal is accordingly allowed.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ______________________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J 28.11.2022 vs