Tharis Muhammed vs The Superintending Engineer
2023 Latest Caselaw 8884 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
     MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1945
                        WP(C) NO. 24329 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

          THARIS MUHAMMED
          AGED 27 YEARS
          VARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, AVANAVANCHERRY P.O,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695106

          BY ADV K.K.RAZIA



RESPONDENT:

          THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
          PWD BUILDING, SOUTH CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
          PIN - 695001

          BY ADV ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA




          SMT. VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GP




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 24329 OF 2023

                                         2

                    P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
              -------------------------------
                  W.P.(C)No.24329 of 2023
             --------------------------------
          Dated this the 14th day of August, 2023

                               JUDGMENT

Above writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:

"Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondent to include the petitioner's tender also along with other applicants."

2. The petitioner is a contractor under the category of CIVIL-B in

Thiruvananthapuram District. Pursuant to the tender invitation of the

respondents for the work General NCC Training Centre, Kallara,

Thiruvananthapuram Phase 1 parade Ground/ Helipad and related to

Amenities General Civil Work, the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 tender.

But the tender of the petitioner is not considered while opening the

tender of the other 7 applicants. No reason is stated for not including

the name of the petitioner and no intimation was also given to the

petitioner is the grievance. Hence this writ petition. When this writ

petition came up for consideration this Court directed the learned

Government Pleader to get instructions. The respondents filed a WP(C) NO. 24329 OF 2023

counter affidavit. It will be better to extract the relevant portion of the

counter affidavit:

3. It is submitted that the work General NCC Training Centre Kallara, Thiruvananthapuram phase-1 Parade Ground/Hellipad and related amminities General Civil work was tendered vide Tender/Notice No. PWD/BLDG/TR/24322/2022-5- 1/1. A true copy of the Notice inviting tender is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R(a). Accordingly 8 bids were received and the tenders were opened on 12.07.2023. As per the bid conditions, all the bidders have to execute a preliminary agreement for participating in the tender and the same was also submitted by the petitioner vide Exhibit P3.

4. It is submitted that at the time when tender was opened documents submitted by all the bidders were verified based on bid condition. On verification of the required documents it was noted that in the form of tender submitted by the petitioner, the petitioner stated that his bid would be valid only for 30 days as against the requirement of minimum 60 days as per bid conditions.

5. It is submitted that as per instructions to bidders (ITB) of Standard Bid Document (SBD), Clause 3.5.1; bids shall remain valid for 60 days from the date of opening of bids. A true copy of the relevant extract of Standard Bid Document is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R(b). A bid valid for a short period shall be rejected by the tendering authority as non- responsive. Based on this condition, the bid submitted by the petitioner was rejected on 14.07.2023. A true copy of the tender summary report is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R(c).

WP(C) NO. 24329 OF 2023

6. It is submitted that whenever a tender is rejected or accepted, all bidders will get a text message through e-mail/text message in their registered phone number through e-tender site. Hence the allegations of the petitioner that he was not informed about his rejection is baseless, false, misguiding and hence to be rejected.

In the light of the above counter affidavit, it is clear that the

petitioner submitted the bid valid only for 30 days, when the tender

inviting notification saying that it should be minimum 60 days as per

the bid conditions. If that is the case, nothing can be done. Therefore,

this writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE SVP WP(C) NO. 24329 OF 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24329/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 20.04.2023.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER FORM DATED 30.06.2023

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PRELIMINARY AGREEMENT DATED 30.06.2023

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE BOQ SUMMARY DETAILS DATED NIL.

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

Exhibit R(a)              True copy of Tender
                          No.PWD/BLDG/TR/24322/2022-5-1-1/1

Exhibi R(b)               A True copy of the relevant extract of
                          Standard Bid Document

Exhibit R(c)              A True copy of the Tender Summary Report