AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral):
The petitioner has challenged the award of the tender in favour of respondent No.4 on the ground that respondent No.4 executed the agreement and
furnished the bank guarantee beyond the period stipulated in the NIT.
Clauses 11.1 to 11.1.5 of the NIT read as under: -
“11.1 Award of Contract:-
11.1.1 Pt. B.D. Sharma UHS, Rohtak will award the contract to the successful evaluated bidder whose bid has been found to be responsive and who
is eligible and qualified to perform the contract satisfactorily as per the terms and conditions incorporated in the bidding document.
11.1.2 The authorities will communicate the successful bidder by email and Registered post that his bid has been accepted. This letter (hereinafter and
in the condition of contract called the “Letter of Awardâ€) shall prescribe the amount which Department will pay to the contractor in consideration
of the execution of work/services by the contractor as prescribed in the contract.
11.1.3 The successful bidder will be required to execute an agreement in the form specified in Annexure â€" V-A within a period of 21 days from the
date of issue of Letter of Award but before the work is taken up for execution.
11.1.4 The successful bidder shall be required to furnish a Performance Security/Bank Guarantee within 15 days of receipt of ‘Letter of
Award’ for an amount equal to 10% (Ten Percent) of the estimated total cost of the contract for one years (sic), in the form of Bank Guarantee
from a commercial bank in an acceptable form (Annexure â€"VI) in favor of the Registrar, Pt. B.D Sharma UHS, Rohtak. The Performance
Security/Bank Guarantee shall remain valid up to clearance of all dues. In case the contract period is extended further, the validity of Performance
Security shall also be extended by the contractor accordingly.
11.1.5 Failure of the successful bidder to comply with the requirements of above clauses shall constitute sufficient grounds for the annulment of the
award and forfeiture of Bid Security.â€
The letter of acceptance was issued on 07.02.2018. The period of 15 days and 21 days for furnishing the bank guarantee and signing the agreement
expired on 22.02.2018 and 28.02.2018, respectively. The private respondent, however, furnished a part of the amount of guarantee on 28.02.2018 and
a guarantee for the remaining amount on 03.03.2018. The agreement was signed on 06.03.2018.
We are not inclined to interfere with the award of the work in favour of the private respondent for more than one reason. Firstly, clause 11.1.5 does
not provide for an automatic termination of the letter of acceptance in the event of there being any delay on the part of the bidder in furnishing the
guarantee and/or signing the agreement. Clause 11.1.5 states that the delay would constitute sufficient grounds for the annulment of the award
and    forfeiture of bid security. Whether the grounds are sufficient or not would depend upon the facts of each case. To reiterate, the
grounds, even if they exist, do not, in all circumstances, lead to the consequence of annulment of the award of tender and/or forfeiture of the bid
security.
After signing the letter of acceptance, correspondence had ensued between the parties in the course of which the private respondent sought
clarification and the official respondents furnished the same.
In the circumstances, the official respondents were entirely justified in condoning the delay. Added to this is the fact that the private
respondent’s bid is substantially lower than that of the other bidders.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
  Â
   The NIC shall be entitled to receive the payment made by the petitioner.