Patna High Court
Vijay Kumar Jha vs The State Of Bihar on 24 March, 2025
Author: A. Abhishek Reddy
Bench: A. Abhishek Reddy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16264 of 2024
======================================================
Vijay Kumar Jha son of Kameshwar Jha, resident of Koshi Road, Nagar
Parishad, Ward No. 12 Supaul, P.S.- Supaul, District- Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
Rural Works (R.W.D.), Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Engineer-in-Chief, Department of Rural Works (R.W.D.), Government
of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Chief Engineer-4 Purnia Department of Rural Works (R.W.D.),
Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Superintending Engineer, Department of Rural Works (R.W.D.), Works
Circle, Madhepura.
5. The Project Director, Mukhyamantri Gramin Sarak Yojna (MMGSY), Patna.
6. The Technical Secretary to Engineer-in-Chief, Department of Rural Works
(R.W.D.), Patna.
7. The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Supaul.
8. The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division,
Triveniganj, District Supaul.
9. The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Birpur,
District Supaul.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Mishra, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader (05)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 24-03-2025
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed for the following
relief(s):-
"That the petitioner above named crave
for indulgence of this Hon'ble Court by way of
issuance of any appropriate order/orders,
direction/direction, writ/writs, commanding and
directing the respondents concerned to accept and
allow the bids submitted by the petitioner declaring it
as qualified for different tender IDs with regard to
construction of roads under Mukhyamantri Gramin
Sarak Yojana (MMGSY only hereinafter) Under NDB
assisted Bihar, rural roads projects in which the
Patna High Court CWJC No.16264 of 2024 dt.24-03-2025
2/5
petitioner being a government contractor with long
experience and all requisite eligibility has submitted
tenders under different tender IDs, but the concerned
respondent have illegally declared tenders of the
petitioner as disqualified on the same ground of
mismatch of annual turnover shown in the audit report
and annual turnover in UDIN of petitioner available
online which is very much illegal false and misleading
as the petitioner has very much shown correct annual
turnover in the audit reports submitted with tender
paper while in the UDIN generated by the CA of the
petitioner has due to inadvertence and clerical mistake
shown annual turnover for financial year 2019-2020
as D/92.77475 lakhs which, although soon been stood
rectified by the CA as per rules and correct annual
turnover of ₹597.38594 lakhs has been shown in
UDIN also and in this regards
application/representation has also been filed by the
petitioner with request to review of bids of the
petitioner in the light of updated UDIN, but in a very
arbitrary and prejudice manner, the bids of the
petitioner stood declared as disqualified Vide meetings
of Departmental technical bid evaluation committee
dated 15.09.2024 which has got no legal leg to stand
upon. Any other relief or relief, for which the
petitioner is found entitled to in the fact and
circumstances of this case."
3. It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the
tender issued by the respondent authority under the Mukhya
Gramin Sadak Yojana (MGSY), the petitioner has participated in
six tenders under different IDs. However, the petitioner's tenders
were disqualified on the ground that the turn over of the petitioner
for the year 2019-20 as reflected in the audit report uploaded by
the builder does not match with the annual turn over shown online.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
has stated that except the above reason, the petitioner was
Patna High Court CWJC No.16264 of 2024 dt.24-03-2025
3/5
qualified in every other manner. Learned counsel has further stated
that for the financial year 2019-20, the Chartered Accountant had
already rectified the mistake in the calculation and submitted the
corrected figures and generated afresh UDIN. Learned counsel has
stated that the Chartered Accountant by mistake had assessed the
turn over for the year 2019-20 as Rs. 192.77475 lakhs though the
subsequent corrected annual turn over is shown as Rs. 597.38594
lakhs. The petitioner has submitted application/ representation
seeking review of the updated turnover, however, the Technical
Bid Evaluation Committee has disqualified the petitioner on
15.09.2024
. Learned counsel has therefore, prayed this Hon'ble
Court to set aside the impugned disqualification and direct the
authorities to take into consideration the corrected annual turn over
for evaluating the bid of the petitioner.
5. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents, the
authorities while accepting that the petitioner has participated in
six tenders under various IDs have stated that the tenders
submitted by the petitioner was disqualified as the audit report for
the year 2019-20 uploaded by the petitioner does not match with
the annual turn over shown online. That as per Clause 4.7(i) of
ITB (SBD), the tenders submitted by the petitioner was
disqualified. Though the petitioner has filed his objection/
Patna High Court CWJC No.16264 of 2024 dt.24-03-2025
representation bringing it notice of the authority about the
discrepancy in the annual turn over for the year 2019-20, the
Technical Bid Evaluation Committee reviewed the same in its
meeting held on 15.09.2024 and rejected the same on the ground
that the corrected UDIN cannot be considered for the evaluation of
the bidder after the last date of tender. Further, it is stated that as
per the Clause 21.3 of the Standard Bidding Documents for
MMGSY (AWSESH) "No bid shall be modified or withdrawn
after the deadline of submission of bids". Further, it is stated that
the respondents had already entered into the agreement with the
successful bidders and letter of acceptance and work order were
also issued by the competent authority.
6. In the reply filed by the petitioner except stating that
the cases of other bidders where discrepancies were found were
given an opportunity of reconsideration, nothing has been said
denying the other averments made in the counter-affidavit.
7. The only issue involved in the present writ petition is
whether the case of the petitioner ought to have been reconsidered
in view of the representation made by him.
8. Admittedly, in this case, there is discrepancy in the
offline annual turn over for the year 2019-20 and the online turn
over reflected in the UDIN. Whatever may be the cause, once the
Patna High Court CWJC No.16264 of 2024 dt.24-03-2025
petitioner submits a bid and the last date is over. Having regard to
the Clause 21.3 of the Standard Bidding Documents for MMGSY
(AWSESH) which reads as; "No bid shall be modified or withdrawn
after the deadline of submission of bids", the subsequent documents
or clarifications cannot be taken into consideration.
9. Even though in the counter-affidavit, a specific stand
has been taken that the respondents have already entered into a
contract and issued the work order in favour of the successful
bidders, the petitioner has not bothered to implead them nor
challenge the work contract issued in their favour.
10. Having regard to the above mentioned facts and
circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in the present
writ petition which warrants any interference by this Court.
11. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.
(A. Abhishek Reddy, J)
Ayush/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 27.03.2025.
Transmission Date NA
