Orissa High Court
Batakrushna Mohapatra vs State Of Odisha on 3 March, 2025
Author: K.R. Mohapatra
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 24772 OF 2023
(An application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India)
*****
Batakrushna Mohapatra ...... Petitioner
-Versus-
1. State of Odisha
2. Odisha State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.,
Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khurda,
3. Collector, Deogarh-Cum-Chairman,
District Tender Committee, Deogarh,
Dist: Deogarh,
4. Civil Supplies Officer-Cum-District Manager,
Odisha State Civil Supplies Corporation,
Deogarh, Dist: Deogarh
....... Opp. Parties
Advocates appeared:
For Petitioner : Ms. Saswati Mohapatra, Advocate
For Opp. Parties : Mr. Swayambhu Mishra,
Additional Standing Counsel
(For Opposite Party Nos.1 and 3)
Mr. Samir Kumar Mishra, Sr. Advocate
being assisted by Mr. Satyajit Panigrahi,
Advocate
CORAM :
MR. JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
& MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
------------------------------------------------
Heard and disposed of on 03.03.2025
----------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
By the Bench;
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
W.P.(C) No. 24772 OF 2023
2. Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order
dated 24th July, 2023 (Annexure-5) issued by the District
Manager, Odisha State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited,
Deogarh-Opposite Party No.4 (for brevity 'the Corporation') in
issuing fresh Tender Call Notice (TCN) for appointment of
Level-II Transport Contractor in respect of Reamal Block of
Deogarh district and prays for a direction to the Opposite Party
No.4, i.e., District Manager, Odisha State Civil Supplies
Corporation Limited, Deogarh to accept the bid of the Petitioner
in terms of Clause-29 of the O.P.W.D. Code (Volume-II).
3. Ms. Mohapatra, learned Counsel for the Petitioner
submits that the Tender Call Notice No.1072 dated 21st April,
2023 was floated by the Opposite Party No.4 for appointment of
Level-II Transport Contractors of Reamal Block. The said notice
was cancelled due to technical error. Subsequently, the Tender
Call Notice No.1376 to 1380 dated 16.05.2023 was also
cancelled on 6th June, 2023 as there was only single technically
qualified bid. Subsequent tenders were also cancelled on
selfsame ground. Pursuant to the Tender Call Notice for the years
2023-2025, only the Petitioner was adjudged technically
qualified. But the said tender was also cancelled as the Petitioner
was the only technically qualified bidder. The said action of the
Tender Inviting Authority is under challenge in this writ petition.
4. It is her submission that in view of Clause-29 of the
O.P.W.D. Code (Volume-II), when in response to a notice calling
for tenders, only a single tender is received in the first time, the
W.P.(C) No. 24772 OF 2023
tenders shall be cancelled without opening of the bid and a fresh
tender be invited publicly. If single tender is received, even after
retendering then the approval of the next higher authority should
be obtained, if the tender is otherwise in order and acceptable.
Thus, the Corporation without cancelling the bid of the
Petitioner, should have opened the price bid of the Petitioner and
issued the work order in favour of the Petitioner, if it is in order.
She, therefore, submits that the Corporation has committed a
serious error of law in not getting the approval of the next higher
authority and opening the price bid of the Petitioner. In
consequence, the fresh tender call notice under Annexure-5 is
also illegal and liable to be struck down.
5. Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the
Collector and District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, District Tender
Committee, Deogarh-Opposite Party No.3 submits that Clause-
29 of the O.P.W.D. Code (Volume-II) is only applicable, when a
single tender is received. But in the instant case, on each
occasion when tender for appointment of Transport Contractor
Level-II was invited, multiple bids were received but the said
tenders were cancelled, as there was only one single responsive
bid on every occasion. Thus, the Opposite Party No.3 has not
committed any error in cancelling the tender process.
6. Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the
Corporation submits that amongst all, one of the tender
conditions is as follows:
W.P.(C) No. 24772 OF 2023
"OPENING OF TENDERS:
i.xxxxxx
ii.xxxxxx
iii.xxxxxx
iv. After technical evaluation of the tender and
selection of the technically qualified Bidders, the
financial bids of the technically qualified bidders only
shall be opened (online) on the due date and time of
opening to be notified after technical bid evaluation.
However, Financial Bid not be opened in case of single
bid, either before technical evaluation or after technical
evaluation. In such case fresh tender shall be floated as
per Works Department Office Memorandum No.16/W
darted.01.01.2015."
7. Since the Petitioner accepting the tender conditions
applied for the tender, he cannot raise any objection to the
cancellation of the tender process. He further submits that only
few days remain for expiry of the period for which the tender in
question was invited. The Petitioner is continuing to operate as
Level-II Contractor on negotiation due to non-availability of the
Level-II Contractors. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the writ
petition.
8. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
9. Perused the materials on record. It is not in dispute that
on last three occasions, tenders invited by the Opposite Party
No.4 for appointment of Level-II Transport Contractor for
Reamal Block was rejected either on the ground of technical
error or on the ground that there was only single responsive bid.
But the tender condition, i.e., para-11(iv) as pointed out by
W.P.(C) No. 24772 OF 2023
Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the
Corporation that if only one technical bid is found to be valid, the
tender process would be cancelled. Accepting the same, the
Petitioner applied for the tender and was found to be single
responsive bidder, whose bid was found technically qualified.
Thus, the Tender Inviting Authority (Opposite Party No.3) has
committed no error in cancelling/keeping in abeyance the bid in
view of the Clause 11(iv) of the Tender Condition.
10. Thus, there is no infirmity in cancelling/keeping in
abeyance the tender process for the year 2023-2025. However,
fresh tender may be floated in respect of the said job in view of
the memorandum No.16/W dated 1st January, 2015.
11. In view of the above, the writ petition being devoid of
any merits, stands dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of
the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(S.K. Mishra)
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack,
Dated 3rd March, 2025/Mona
Location: High Court of Odisha
W.P.(C) No. 24772 OF 2023
