Association Of Ups And Power ... vs Oriental Bank Of Commerce And Ors.
2002 Latest Caselaw 1925 Del

ORDER

1. We have Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the petition. The petitioner is placing reliance upon the decision of Division Bench in CW 3665/2002 in Association of UPS and Power Conditioning Systems Manufacturer v. Society of Applied Microwave Electronics Engineering and Research (Sameer) and Ors., decided on 13th August, 2002 in order to challenge one of the eligibility conditions stipulated in the public notice issued by the respondent for empanelment of vendors for supply, installation and maintenance of uninteruppted power supply systems. In the impugned notice, condition is that the turnover of the bidder from UPS business should not be less than Rs. 15 crores in India during the last financial year and that it should be a profitable company. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that such a criteria is violative of the petitioner's fundamental rights to bid and participate in tender and such a criteria was held to be unreasonable in view of the aforementioned decision of this Court in which the reliance was placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in Rashbihari Panda, etc. v. State of Orissa, .

2. We have gone through the detailed terms and other conditions laid down in the impugned notice, including eligibility criteria for bidders as also the decision relied upon. The respondent intends to empanel UPS vendors for fresh installation and replacement of old non-operational UPS of different capacities ranging from 2 KVA to 20 KVA at various branches spread over the country which number at present is 975. Eligibility also provides that the bidder should have national presence and should be engaged in supply of maintenance of UPS and its batteries in India for a period of five years should not have installed less than 5000 UPS, should have its support offices at minimum of 50 centres, should not be a regional player and should be able to provide efficient and effective support at various States, including Metro/Urban/Semi-Urban/Rural Branches and offices, should be the manufacturer of UPS or their authorised representative in India. Considering the magnitude of the work which is required to be performed throughout the country, including metros and even rural branches, we do not find any irrationality in the criteria laid down tinder the conditions that the turnover of the bidders from UPS business should not be less than Rs. 15 crores.

3. In the case relied upon by the petitioner, the annual turnover of Rs. 10 crores fixed was not challenged where only 34 Nos. of UPS were to be supplied and the price of 1 KVA Online UPS is only Rs 39,324/-. The case was decided on its own facts which are not applicable in the instant case.

The petition is dismissed.