WPMS/816/2023
2023 Latest Caselaw 1471 UK

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                                 AT NAINITAL
                  HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI
                                       AND
                     HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH THAPLIYAL

                 WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO. 813 OF 2023
                                24TH MAY, 2023
BETWEEN:
M/s Patelpurta Agro Farm                                     .....Petitioner.
And

State of Uttarakhand & others                                ....Respondents.

With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO. 815 OF 2023 BETWEEN:

M/s Patelpurta Agro Farm .....Petitioner. And

State of Uttarakhand & others ....Respondents.

With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO. 816 OF 2023 BETWEEN:

M/s Patelpurta Agro Farm .....Petitioner. And

State of Uttarakhand & others ....Respondents.

Counsel for the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aditya Singh and Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsels.

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 :          Mr. Amarendra Pratap Singh,
                                                learned    Additional  Advocate
                                                General for the State.

Counsel for the Respondent No.3          :      Mr. Vikas     Bahuguna,   learned
                                                counsel.

The Court made the following:

COMMON JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Vipin Sanghi)

We have heard learned counsels, and proceed to

dispose of these writ petitions by this common judgment.

2. The petitioner had participated in the tenders

invited by the respondents, i.e. the Fisheries Department of

the State, for granting license for fishing in different

reservoirs. The petitioner's technical bids were rejected by

the Technical Evaluation Committee of the respondents, and

the reasons stated for the said rejections were the following:-

Name of Firm    M/s Jai Shiv   M/s Patel Putra      Agro     M/s     Ajmer   M/s Anita
Name       of   Shakti         Farm Pvt. Ltd.
Reservoir       Enterprises                                  Singh

Beghul             XXXX        1) The balance sheet/               XXXX         XXXX
Reservoir                      financial statement is
                               not     containing      the
                               signatures of Auditor
                               and Proprietor.
                               2) The work experience
                               certificate directly is not
                               issued for the firm.
                               3) The UDIN is not
                               generated in balance
                               sheet
Dhaura             XXXX                 As Above                   XXXX         XXXX
Reservoir
Nanak Sagar        XXXX                As Above                    XXXX         XXXX
Reservoir

3. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the rejection of

its technical bids, preferred these three writ petitions in

respect of three similar tenders for different reservoirs.

4. The respondents have filed their counter-affidavit

justifying the rejection of the technical bids of the petitioner.

The rejection of the petitioner's technical bides has been done

on three grounds. If either of them is sustainable, the

rejection of the petitioner's technical bids would stand. We

are, therefore, presently only concern with the third ground

of rejection, i.e. the Unique Document Identification Number

(for short 'UDIN') is not generated in the balance-sheet etc.

5. Before examining the documents placed on record,

we may take note of Clause 6(iv) of the Tender Document.

The same stipulates that the bidder as to provide "िवगत तीन

िव ीय वष म औषत ० 5.00 करोड़ का टनओवर का माणक िजस हे तु

ऑिडटे ड बैलस शीट व लाभ हािन खkता एवं चाटड अकाउं टट का माण प ".

6. The aforesaid would show that the bidders were

required to provide their audited balance-sheet and profit and

loss account statement, and a certificate issued by the

Chartered Accountant to establish their turnover of Rs.5.00

Crores average over past three years.

7. The petitioner states that, along with its tender, the

petitioner provided the Tax Audit Reports in Forms 3CB and

3CD, which were signed by the petitioner's Director, apart

from the Chartered Accountant.

8. According to the petitioner, the Tax Audit Reports,

which were duly filed along with the income tax returns by

the petitioner, were submitted along with the petitioner's

bids. These Tax Audit Reports also contain the balance-sheets

as on 31.03.2022 (Assessment Year 2022-23), 31.03.2021

(Assessment Year 2021-22), and 31.03.2020 (Assessment

Year 2020-21).

9. Admittedly, the Tax Audit Reports, and

consequently, the balance-sheets and the profit and loss

account for the relevant years did not bear the UDIN. The

petitioner has placed on record the Chartered Accountant's

certificate dated 08.12.2022, certifying the turnover of the

petitioner from the Financial Year 2018-19 to 2021-22, which

bears the UDIN.

10. The submission of Mr. Singh, learned counsel for

the petitioner is that, there was sufficient compliance of

Clause 6(iv), since the petitioner had placed before the

respondents along with its bids the Tax Audit Reports in

Forms 3CB and 3CD, which also contained the balance-sheets

as well as the profit and loss account statement for the

relevant period. He submits that merely because the UDIN

was not affixed on the said tax audit reports, the same do not

become doubtful.

11. On the other hand, the respondents have placed on

record the notification dated 02.08.2019, which reads as

follows:-

"The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (set up by an Act of Parliament) NOTIFICATION New Delhi, 2nd August, 2019 NO.1-CA(7)/192/2019.- Whereas, to curb the malpractice of false certification/ attestation by the unauthorized persons & to eradicate the practice of bogus certificates and to save various regulators, banks, stakeholders etc. from being misled, the Council of the Institute decided to implement an innovative concept to generate Unique Document Identification Number (UDIN) mandatorily for all kinds of the certificates/ GST and tax audit reports and other attest function in phased manner, for which members of the ICAI were notified

through the various announcements published on the website of ICAI www.icai.org at the relevant times.

Now, in exercise of the powers conferred on it under Item No.(1) of Part- II of the Second Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949, the Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India hereby issue the following guidelines for information of public and necessary compliance by members of the Institute-

(i) A member of the Institute in practice shall generate Unique Document Identification Number (UDIN) for all kinds of the certification, GST and Tax Audit Reports and other Audit, Assurance and Attestation functions undertakes/ signed by him which made mandatory from the following dates through announcements published on the website of the ICAI www.icai.org at the relevant time:-  For all Certificates w.e.f. 1st February, 2019.  For all GST and Tax Audit Reports w.e.f. 1st April, 2019.

 For all other Audit, Assurance and Attestation functions w.e.f. 1st July, 2019.

(ii) The above Guidelines shall come into force from the above dates for the various services respectively.

RAKESH SEHGAL, Acting Secy.

[ADVT.III/4//Exty./170/19]".

12. We have considered the submissions of learned

counsels. The bidders were required to submit the audited

balance-sheet and profit and loss account statement, apart

from the Chartered Accountant's certificate to establish the

minimum turnover required of Rs.5.00 Crores on an average

for the post three years. The Technical Evaluation Committee

which evaluates the bids of all the bidders undertakes the

said exercise by sitting in its office. The Technical Evaluation

Committee, therefore, is entitled to require the bidders to

submit duly authenticated documents, which could be relied

upon and verified, if necessary, from its own office.

13. The Technical Evaluation Committee is not

expected to run around and gather information from

departments, such as Income Tax Department, to verify the

authenticity of the documents filed by the bidders. Such an

exercise, if required to be undertaken by the Technical

Evaluation Committee, would impede the process of the

tenders and defeat the very purpose of tendering the works,

which will generate revenue for the State.

14. The notification dated 02.08.2019 clearly sets out

the purpose of its issuance, and the reason for evolution of

the UDIN mechanism. The Tax Audit Reports are mandatorily

required to have the Unique Document Identification Number

in the light of the aforesaid notification. The Tax Audit

Reports, placed on record by the petitioner, do not have the

UDIN.

15. That being the position, the Technical Evaluation

Committee was justified in not relying on the same, since the

authenticity of the Tax Audit Reports, produced by the

petitioner along with the bids, could not be verified and

established.

16. Consequently, in our view, the rejection of the

petitioner's technical bids on the ground that the Tax Audit

Reports did not bear the UDIN appears to be completely

justified, and therefore, there is no merit in these petitions.

17. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petitions are

dismissed.

18. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.)

(RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.) Dated: 24th May, 2023 NISHANT