Himachal Pradesh High Court
Harsh Kumar vs State Of H.P And Others on 12 September, 2024
Author: M.S. Ramachandra Rao
Bench: M.S. Ramachandra Rao
( 2024:HHC:8726
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
CWP no. 1156 of 2024
Decided on: 12th September, 2024
_______________________________________________________
.
Harsh Kumar ....Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P and others ...Respondents.
________________________________________________________
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge
Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the petitioner:
For the respondents:
r to Mr. Ajay Sharma, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Atharv Sharma, Advocate.
Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General
with Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional
Advocate General, for respondents no.1
to 3.
None for respondent no.4.
M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice (oral)
The petitioner has challenged in this Writ petition proceedings
dt.18.01.2024 issued by 3rd respondent and also proceedings
Annexure P-3 dt.31.01.2024 of the 3rd respondent issuing a fresh
tender.
2) The admitted facts are that a notice inviting e-tender was issued
by the 3rd respondent for supply of surgical consumable items on
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
19.08.2023 stipulating date and time for submission of online bid.
The date of submission of bids was prescribed as 06.09.2023 to
26.09.2023 and its opening date was mentioned as 30.09.2023. The
.
date of starting of uploading was later amended from 06.09.2023 to
14.09.2023 and the date of uploading end date was also amended
from 26.09.2023 to 03.10.2023.
3) On 04.10.2023, the e-tenders were opened and scrutinized by
the Committee constituted by the 3rd respondent for the said purpose.
In the technical scrutiny, only petitioner was found technically fit and
all other participating firms were found not qualified by the
Committee.
4) However on 20.11.2023, the purchase Committee under the
Chairmanship of the 3rd respondent took a decision to give time to
other tenderers to submit deficit documents by extending the date for
submission of the said documents since that was the ground on which
they were not earlier held to be eligible.
5) Thereafter the documents were submitted and the Committee
again evaluated the same and found in its proceedings dt.06.01.2024
that two more firms other than the petitioner also became technically
qualified as regards supply of surgical consumable items are
concerned.
6) Curiously, the respondent no.4, holding the Office of the 3rd
respondent, unilaterally cancelled the tender dt.19.08.2023 on
18.01.2024 merely stating that cancellation was due to administrative
.
reasons. He was himself a party to the decision taken on 04.10.2023
and also to the decision taken on 06.01.2024 as he was also part of
the technical evaluation Committee. Therefore, he could not have
unilaterally cancelled the tender and is estopped by his own conduct
(as he had held alongwith other members of the Committee that the
petitioner and other two firms are technically qualified) from taking
any action to cancel the tender.
7) He has also got issued Annexure P-3, a fresh e-tender for
procurement of the same surgical consumables as a consequence to
his order of cancellation taken on 18.01.2024, which therefore cannot
be sustained.
8) This Court on 27.02.2024 has stayed all further proceedings
pursuant to the re-tender dt.31.01.2024 and the said order is
subsisting.
9) The learned Advocate General on instructions sought to
contend that respondent no.3/4 is now of the opinion that the
petitioner had attached two authority letters from two suppliers for
supply of certain tender items, but those firms do not manufacture
the quoted tender items, which are 44 in number.
10) We are of the opinion that he is again estopped from taking the
said stand having himself approved as a member of technical
.
Committee, the bid of the petitioner and the other two firms as
mentioned above.
11) Accordingly, the impugned proceedings dt.18.01.2024 issued
by respondent no.3/4 cancelling the tender dt.19.08.2023 as well as
the consequential e-tender issued on 31.01.2024 are both set aside
and the respondents are directed to award the contract for supply of
the surgical consumables to the petitioner alongwith others persons,
who were found qualified by the technical committee as mentioned
above. However, this will not preclude the respondents from issuing
a fresh e-tender for more surgical consumables without affecting the
right created in favour of the petitioner and the other two successful
tenderers.
12) In view of the above, the Writ petition is disposed of alongwith
pending applications, if any.
( M.S. Ramachandra Rao )
Chief Justice
12th September, 2024 ( Satyen Vaidya )
(priti) Judge
