Karwa Enterprises Pvt. Ltd vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1029 Chatt

                                      1

                                                                    NAFR

            HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                          WPC No. 998 of 2022


Karwa Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. B - 85 (Iind Floor), G.T. Karnal Road,
Industrial Area, Delhi 110033 Through Its Authorized Signatory, Vinod
Jethani, Son Of A.D. Jethani, Aged About 44 Years, Residence Of C - 17,
Radha Swami Nagar, Near Bhatagaon Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur
Chhattisgarh.

                                                            ---- Petitioner

                                  Versus

1.    State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Health And Family
      Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur,
      Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2.    Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Through Its Managing
      Director, Sector 27, Housing Board, Complex, Nava Raipur, Atal
      Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3.    Chhattisgarh Infotech Promotion Society Through Its Chief
      Executive Officer, State Data Centre, Building, Civil Lines, Raipur,
      District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

                                                         ---- Respondents

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner : Mr. C.Jayant K. Rao, Advocate with Mr. Harish Khutiya, Advocate.

For Respondents No. 1: Ms. Astha Shukla, Government Advocate.

For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Animesh Tiwari, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

Hon'ble Shri N. K. Chandravanshi, Judge

Judgment on Board

Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

24.02.2022

Heard Mr. C.Jayant K. Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner along

with Mr. Harish Khutiya. Also heard Ms. Astha Shukla, learned

Government Advocate, appearing for respondent No. 1 and Mr. Animesh

Tiwari, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No.2.

2. The petitioner is a pharmaceutical company and it participated in a

tender floated by the respondent No. 2, bearing Tender Reference No.81/

KT(P)/CGMSCL/Kit/2021-22 dated 30.10.2021. It is a tender for rate

contract of kit to Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Ltd. The

respondent No. 2 declared the petitioner ineligible in the Summary Sheet

of Cover-A, dated 03.01.2022, on the ground that the petitioner had not

written "or the process charged by us to wholesalers or for institutional

supplies in last six months. We also confirm that we will not supply the

quoted item in lower rate to any organization during validity of contract if

contract is awarded" in point No. 02 of submitted Annexure - 5 and also

for not writing "Manufacturing and Marketing for last 3 years" in submitted

Market Standing Certificate.

3. The date of submission of objection / clarification in response to

Summary Sheet of Cover - A dated 03.01.2022, was fixed on

06.01.2022.

4. The final Summary Sheet of Cover - A was opened on 09.02.2022

and the petitioner was declared ineligible in the final Summary Sheet of

Cover - A.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had submitted

objection / clarification by an e-mail dated 05.01.2022, but the same was

not considered while objection lodged by another tenderer, namely, M/s

ANG Life Sciences India Limited, was considered.

6. In the writ petition, the petitioner had annexed the screenshot of the

e-mail sent to the respondent No. 2 at page No. 64.

7. On the last occasion, when the matter was listed on 21.02.2022,

Mr. Animesh Tiwari prayed for listing of this matter today in order to

enable him to obtain instructions as to whether the e-mail was received

by the respondent No. 2.

8. On instructions, Mr. Tiwari submits that, indeed, the e-mail was

received by respondent No. 2, but due to inadvertence, the same was not

considered. Mr. Tiwari submits that the objection contained in the e-mail

will be considered by the Tender Evaluation Committee and thereafter,

appropriate steps will be taken depending on the outcome of the

evaluation of objection received. He further submits that till the objection /

clarification as contained in the e-mail of the petitioner is considered and

disposed of, evaluation of tenders of other tenderers shall be kept in hold.

9. In view of the above submission of Mr. Tiwari, Mr. Rao submits that

there is no surviving cause of action in this petition and, accordingly, the

present writ petition may be disposed of.

10. In view of the above submissions of the learned counsel for the

parties, the writ petition stands disposed of, recording the submissions of

Mr. Tiwari.

                      Sd/-                                       Sd/-
            (Arup Kumar Goswami)                       (N. K. Chandravanshi)
                 Chief Justice                                 Judge




Hem