AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Vipin Sanghi, CJ
Issue notice. Learned counsels appear and accept notice on behalf of the respondents, except respondent no.6.
The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition aggrieved by the rejection of the petitioner’s technical bids in respect of five tenders invited vide National Competitive Bidding E-Tender Notice dated 25.07.2023.
The petitioner participated in all the five tenders, and the petitioner’s technical bids have been rejected in each of those five tenders on the ground “bid not qualified”. However, there is no reason furnished by the respondents as to on what basis the bid of the petitioner was not qualified.
Ex facie, the said communication is defective. Mr. Patni, learned Senior Counsel for respondent nos.2 to 4, who appears on advance notice, acknowledges the fact that the petitioner should have been granted the reason for rejection of the petitioner’s technical bid.
On instructions, he submits that, after opening of the technical bids, the financial bides of the technically qualified bidders were opened. However, no approval for grant of contract has yet been granted, and no contract has been awarded to any of the qualified bidders in any of the five tenders. He further submits that after opening the financial bides, the respondents have uploaded the reasons for rejections of the petitioner’s technical bids. He submits that the said reasons shall be communicated to the petitioner during the course of the day on the petitioner’s e-mail.
Let the reasons for the rejection of the petitioner’s technical bids be communicated to it during the course of the day. The respondents shall not award the contract for the next three days.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.