High CourtsSingle Bench(2019) 11 CAL CK 0059

Solar Industries India Limited And Another vs Coal India Limited And Others

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 19 November 2019

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petitions (WP) No. 15196 (W) Of 2019, Civil Application (CAN) No. 9076 Of 2019

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

16 paragraphs · 623 words

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J

Affidavits-in-opposition and affidavits-in-reply filed in court today be taken on record.

The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent authorities flouted their own Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) -cum - e-Reverse auction procedure, in particular Clause 23.1 thereof, by letting people not having the necessary techno-commercial qualifications to participate in the said auction.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners points out that the process was done not only in violation of Clause 23.1 of the NIT itself, but also an order passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court to that effect, dated August 2, 2019, from which it is reflected that learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents-authorities had submitted that only such bidders, who were found to be techno-commercially qualified as per declaration given in the Technical Parameter Sheet (TPS), will be allowed to participate in the e-Reverse Auction.

Learned Single Judge also held that participants having requisite eligibility criteria, as prescribed, were permitted to participate in the e-Reverse Auction and in order to do so, no doubt, the respondent-authorities would look into the bid documents to find out whether an individual participant has the requisite eligibility qualification so as to participate in the e-Reverse Auction.

It is alleged that, from subsequent affidavits-in-opposition filed by the respondent-authorities, it is evident that such direction, as well as Clause 23.1 of the NIT, was flouted, since a stand has been taken in the said affidavits-in-opposition by the respondents-authorities that it is not physically possible to so verify prior to the e-Auction being conducted, since, according to the respondent-authorities, the entire process is governed and conducted by a software where there is no scope of interference by the respondents-authorities either to know the names of the participants or their offers.

This, according to the respondent-authorities, is to lend secrecy to the bids given in order to prevent cartelization of the process.

It is submitted by learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents-authorities that the present writ petition itself has become infructuous in view of the petitioners having participated in the auction process and also being successful therein and having already been awarded contracts pursuant to such success.

As such, it is submitted that the present writ petition is no longer maintainable. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, in reply, argues that the irregularities, which are allegedly going on in the e-Auction process ought to be taken care of and as such, the petitioners are also willing to forego their contract to pursue the present writ petition.

However, it is too late in the day for the petitioner to so offer, since a concluded contract has already been entered into between the parties pursuant to an auction where the petitioner participated, despite having known about the irregularities, if any.

Hence, the present writ petition and the connected application have become infructuous.

Accordingly, W. P. No. 15196(w) of 2019 and CAN 9076(w) of 2019 are dismissed as infructuous.

However, it is made clear that in the event any litigation, including any public interest litigation, is filed challenging the alleged anomalies and irregularities in the system of e-Auction or e-Reverse Auction held by the respondents-authorities in future, this order shall not come in the way of the petitioners raising such questions in an appropriate forum dealing with the matter on its own merits without being influenced by any of the observations made herein.

It is also made clear that the allegations made by the petitioners as regards anomalies and irregularities, in the process of e-Reverse Auction by the respondent-authorities, are denied by the respondents.

There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.