Uttarakhand High Court
8Th October vs Unknown on 18 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH THAPLIYAL
WRIT PETITION (M/B) NO. 301 OF 2023
18TH OCTOBER, 2023
Akhil Bhandari ...... Petitioner
Verses
State of Uttarakhand & another ...... Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Prabhat Bohra, learned counsel
Counsel for the respondents : Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Standing
Counsel for the State /
respondents
The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT: (per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Vipin Sanghi)
The petitioner has preferred the present writ
petition to challenge Clauses 13 and 18 of the tender
conditions contained in the tender notice dated
27.09.2023, for grant of mining leases. By the
impugned conditions, the respondents have required
that the bidders should produce certificate of past
experience of operating a mining lot / mining lease /
stone crusher / screening plant located in riverbed,
issued by the District Mines Officer of the concerned
District. The challenge to the clauses is raised on the
ground that the requirement of prior experience is not
2
borne out from the Uttarakhand Minor Mineral
(Concession) Rules, 2023, framed on 16.06.2023, and,
therefore, such a requirement could not have been
imposed by the respondents in the tender in question.
2) Counsel for the petitioner has, firstly, referred
to Rule 23, which lays down the disqualifications. The
disqualification enumerated in Rule 23 are the following :
"23& iV~Vs ds nsus ij fucZU/ku %&
1- ,sls O;fDr dks uhykeh@fufonk@bZ&uhykeh@bZ&fufonk@bZ&fufonk lg bZ&uhykeh dh
cksyh cksyus ;k iV~Vs ds fy;s fufonk izfØ;k esa Hkkx ysus dh vuqefr ugha nh tk;sxh %&
i. tks Hkkjrh; jkf"Vªd u gksA
ii. ftlds fo:) [kfut ns; cdk;k gksA
iii. ftlus ml ftys ds ftykf/kdkjh vFkok jkT; ljdkj }kjk izkf/kd`r vf/kdkjh] tgkW og
LFkk;h :Ik ls fuokl djrk gS] ls pfj= izek.k i= izkIr u fd;k gksA
iv. ftlus vius vk/kkj dkMZ dh izfr izLrqr u dh gksA
v. tks O;fDr@QeZ@dEiuh fdlh Hkh jkT; esa fu;r frfFk ¼ftl frfFk dks fufonk izfØ;k
esa Hkkx fy;k tk;sxk½ dks CySd fyLVsM@fMckMZ u gksa] dk 'kiFk i= fufonk izfØ;k esa
Hkkx ysus gsrq izLrqr u fd;k gksA
vi. ,slh QeZ ,oa dEiuh ds ekeys] ftlus isu dkMZ] th-,l-Vh- iathdj.k izek.k] QeZ dk
jftLVªs'ku izek.k [email protected] vkQ vkVhZdy dh izfr izLrqr u dh gksA"
3) The argument is that lack of past experience is
not a disqualification under the Rules. Reliance is also
placed on Rule 24, which enlists the documents, which
the bidder may be required to submit. The argument is
that the said Rule does not require submission of past
experience certificate. The said Rule, so far as, it is
relevant reads as follows :
3
"24&bZ&uhykeh dh izfØ;k %&
1- jkT; {ks=kUrxZr unh ry jktLo@ou Hkwfe {ks=ksa ,oa unh ry ls fHkUu jktLo@ou
Hkwfe esa fu;e&20¼1½ ds v/khu fpfUgr mi [kfut ykVksa dks futh O;fDr;ksa@futh
O;fDr;ksa dh dkWijsfVo lfefr@QeZ@dEiuh dks ifjgkj ij Lohd`r djus dh izfØ;k
vkWuykbZu bZ&uhykeh ds ek/;e ls mRrjk[k.M vf/kizkfIr fu;ekoyh&2017 ds
izkfo/kkuqlkj rduhdh fufonk (Techinial Bid) ,oa foRrh; fufonk (Financial
Bid) ij vk/kkfjr gksxh] ftlesa rduhdh ,oa foRrh; fufonk dh dk;Zokgh
uktenders.gov.in ij dh tk;sxhA
i. rduhdh fufonk (Technical Bid) gsrq vko';d vfHkys[k %&
¼,d½ vkosnd dk vk/kkj dkMZ@ernkrk igpku i= dh izfr] QeZ dh n'kk esa QeZ ds
Hkkxhnkjksa ds vk/kkj dkMZ@ernkrk igpku i= dh izfr rFkk dEiuh ds ekeys esa
dkjiksjsV vQs;lZ ea=ky; Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk fuxZr dEiuh ds izcU/k funs'kd dk
Director Identification Number (DIN) ds izek.k i= dh izfr rFkk dkWijsfVo
lkslbVh ds lEcU/k esa v/;{k] mik/;{k ,oa lfpo dk vk/kkj dkMZ@ernkrk igpku i=
dh izfrA
¼nks½ LFkk;h fuokl izek.k i=A
¼rhu½ vkosnd dk v|kof/kd pfj= izek.k i=] lfefr ds ekeyksa esa lfefr ds
v/;{k@lfpo dk pfj= izek.k i=] QeZ ds ekeysa esa lHkh Hkkxhnkjksa dk pfj= izek.k
i= ,oa dEiuh ds ekeys esa bl vk'k; dk 'kiFk i= fd dEiuh dks fdlh vijkf/kd
okn esa nf.Mr ugha fd;k x;k gSA pfj= izek.k i= ml ftys ds ftykf/kdkjh }kjk
iznRr gksxk] tgka vkosnd LFkk;h :Ik ls fuokl djrk gksA
¼pkj½ vkosnd ds iSudkMZ dh izfrA
¼ikap½ vkosnd ds th-,l-Vh- ua0 dh izfrA
¼N%½ cSad [kkrs dk fooj.k] ftlesa bZ&uhykeh ls lEcfU/kr leLr foRrh; gLrkUrj.k
fd;k tk;sxk] ;Fkk cSad o 'kk[kk uke] [kkrk la[;k] vkbZ0,Q0,l0lh0 dksM rFkk ,d
fujLr pSd dh izfrA
¼lkr½ funs'kd] HkwrRo ,oa [kfudeZ funs'kky;] mRrjk[k.M }kjk izkf/kd`r vf/kdkjh }kjk
tkjh fd;k x;k [kuu vns;rk izek.k i=A tgka vkosnd jkT; ds Hkhrj dksbZ [kfut
ifjgkj /kkfjr ugha djrk gksa] ogka bl vk'k; ds 'kiFk i= dh izfrA
¼vkB½ dksijsfVo lkslkbVh ds lEcU/k esa dkWih vkWQ jsT;wys'ku ds leLr i`"Bksa dh
Loizekf.kr izfrA Hkkxhnkjh QeZ ds lEcU/k esa Hkkxhnkjh foys[k ,oa QeZ ds iathdj.k]
dEiuh ds ekeys esa vkfVZdy vkQ ,lksf'k;s'ku dh izfrA
¼ukS½ fdlh Hkh jkT; esa [kuu lafØ;kvksa dh dkyh lwph esa u gksus lEcU/kh 'kiFk i=A
¼nl½ vkosnd o mlds ifjokj ds fo:) [kuu ns;rk gksus ij vkosnu vLohdkj dj
fn;k tk;sxkA"
4) We have heard learned counsel for the
petitioner, and considered his submission, and we do not
find any merit in the same.
4
5) The Rules above referred to nowhere provide
that the State cannot insist on possession of past
experience by the bidders. There is nothing to counter-
indicate the requirement of past experience. It is only
reasonable for the respondents to require proportionate
past experience of the bidders, since mining is a
technical job which requires deployment and use of tools
& tackles, and machinery. We, therefore, do not find
any merit in this petition. The same is, accordingly,
dismissed.
6) The respondents may proceed with the tender
in question. However, it shall be ensured that while
proceeding with the tender in question, and while
proceeding with all other tenders for grant of mining
leases, the prior environmental approval and clearance is
obtained in terms of the Notification dated 14.09.2006,
issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forests,
Government of India.
________________
VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.
_________________
RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.
Dt: 18TH OCTOBER, 2023
Negi
