AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Schedule of Requirement (SoR),,,,,
S. No.,"ITEM Description as per
Technical
Specification",Quantity,,,
Supply of Material (As per technical specification given in Annexure A, B &C)",,,,,
1,"OLT Chassis and allied accessory including 19â€
standard rack/ETSI rack, 24 U size with 1+1
power module etc. and the installation materials
equipped with the line cards in n+1 redundancy
mode.",,54,,
1.1,"GPON Ports (Without redundant linec ards)
(Consignee wise distribution of Ports will be
decided by BSNL).",,1038,,
1.2,Redundant Line Cards (Spare 10% of ports at 1.1),,26,,
1.3,Additional OLT GPON Line Cards,,0,,
,Control/switch/uplink card each:,,108,,
1.4,"With 4 No. Optical GE (1000 Base
LX) interface ports",4,,,
,"With 2 No.FE/GE (10/100/10000
Base T)
Electrical interface Ports",0,,,
1.5,"Control/Switch/uplink card each
with two
(2) 10 GE Uplink ports",,3,,
,,,,,
S.
No.","Section
No./Pag e No.",Claus e No.,Clause Description,Clarification sought,BSNL Clarifications
335,"Section-
3 Part-C","1.4 &
1.5","Control/Switch/Upli nk
card each: With 4 no.
Optical GE (1000 Base LX)
interface ports-4 andÂ
Control/Switch/Upli nk
card each with two (2) 10
GE
Uplink ports","In the SoR two type
          Â
of
controller asked
          Â
at        Sr.
No.1.4 & 1.5 as below
with Sr. No.1.4 stating
One Controller Card
  having
1x4G interface and Sr.
No.1.5
stating
controller
having 2x10G interface.
We      d o
understand that OLT
location would be
equipped with","As per tender.
The quantity of item
under serial number
1.4
(control/switch/uplin
ke with 4 numbers of
GE port in each card)
shall be made twice of
quantity of item at
serial number 1 of
Table C, (i.e. chassis)
in each Package. The
quantity of item under
serial number
1.5
(Control/Switch/Upli
nk with 2 numbers of
10GE port in each
card) shall be made
,,,,"either 2 modules of
controller card with
1x4G interface or two
modules of controller
with
2x10G
interface.
Â
Our understanding is
        Â
augmented by
     the following
      two
clauses: “Technical
specification of
OLT Â in annexure-
1†at page-413, here
clause 6.3.1 says there
should be two
termination
  cards
           Â
in
redundancy/loa
d       sharing
configuration.
At page 419 clause
23.9(i)-
OLT must support
network side cards with
1G ports or 10G ports.
Â
Kindly confirm if
         our
understanding is correct.","twice of quantity of ite
at serial number 1
Table C (i.e. chassis) in
Package. However
ordering of GE card or
10GE card shall be
done as requirement.
XX
X",,Xxx,Xxx,Xxx,Xxx
337,Section-,1.2,"Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Redundant
          Â
Line",Our,Supply of redundant
,3 Part-C,,"Cards (Spare 10% of ports
at 1.1)","understanding according
to requirement Sr. No.1
of the SoR “equipped
with the line cards in
          Â
N+1 redundancy
mode†bidder has
          Â
to provision one
additional 8 port GPON
card at each OLT
location. In addition to
these redundant cards at
Sr. No.1, is Sr. No.1.2
asking for additional
redundant cards.
Kindly confirm.","line card is to be made
as per requirement of
price schedule item
no.1.2 of Table C of
respective package.
This item is the
redundant line card
which is mentioned as
redundant i.e. N+1 of
item at serial number
Item at serial
number 1.1 & 1.2 are
part of material
mentioned at serial
number 1 of
Table C. T
quantity/number
redundant cards in a
SoR and price sched
shall be equal to numb
of chassis at seri
number 1.
BSNL has evidently taken into account the clarification of,,,,,
29.01.2018 which states that the item redundant line card would be S. no.1, 1.1 and 1.2 and has mentioned as part of material mentioned at S. no.1 of",,,,,
table. C. The crucial terms are that the quantity or the number of redundant cards in all SORs and price schedule shall be equal to the chassis at s.,,,,,
no.1. This obviously meant that the number of chassis is part of the OLT channels, i.e. 54. The petitioner’s bid does not conform to these",,,,,
specifications.,,,,,
It has been repeatedly held that tender prescription or tender conditions, its incorporation or application are left to the primary judgment of the",,,,,
executive authority or the public agency which publishes bids eliciting eligible bidders (Refer Central Coal Fields Ltd. v. SLL â€" SML (Joint Venture),,,,,
&Ors. (2016) 8 SCC 622 and Consortium of Titagarh Firema Adler Spa v. Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (2017) 7 SCC 846 and Afcons,,,,,
Infrastructure Ltd. v. Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (2016) 16 SCC 818). In the present case, terms of tender condition at paras 5.2 and 5.3 and",,,,,
the clarification issued on 29.01.2018 were incorporated in the tender condition itself. The bidders, therefore, were required to comply and furnish",,,,,
appropriate bids incorporating the prescribed quantifies. No doubt, on 29.01.2018, the petitioner’s bid was found to be technically eligible. That,",,,,,
however, did not confer any vested or indefeasible right upon it to say that if there was any shortage in the quantities, the other part of the tender",,,,,
conditions could not be insisted upon by BSNL. In this Court’s opinion, the BSNL contends correctly that the price evaluation stage occurs later",,,,,
and that the question of price or cost loading had to be dealt with subsequently. This Court is satisfied that in the overall circumstances of the case, the",,,,,
BSNL neither unfairly considered the terms nor acted in an arbitrary manner in deciding to resort to holding that some bidders had quoted less number,,,,,
of Redundant cards at Sl. no.1.2 and that their tenders could be loaded by CET in terms of clause 9.2.,,,,,
For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in the petition. It is accordingly dismissed.",,,,,