High CourtsSingle Bench(2020) 07 DEL CK 0089

VINS Bioproducts Limited & Anr vs Medical Superintendent, Safdarjung Hospital & Anr

Delhi High Court · Decided on 17 July 2020

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 4213 Of 2020

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

21 paragraphs · 361 words

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J

W.P.(C) 4213/2020 & CM APPL.15174/2020 (stay)

1.

The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

2.

Petitioners impugn communication dated 08.07.2020 (signed on 09.07.2020), whereby, the technical bid of the petitioner was rejected by the

respondents for their tender and petitioners were debarred on the allegation that they had submitted incorrect particulars in their bid. Further petitioner

impugns order dated 10.07.2020 whereby the representation of the petitioner has been rejected.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the debarment order was issued without any show cause notice and without giving any opportunity

to the petitioners to present their case.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that petitioners have received one letter dated 16.07.2020 from the respondent No.1. Copy of

the letter dated 16.07.2020 has been filed through e-mail. The same is taken on record.

5.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 submits that the subject tender has already been cancelled. He further submits that in terms of

letter dated 16.07.2020, the order dated 08.07.2020 (signed on 09.07.2020) had only rejected the bid of the petitioners for participation in that tender.

He submits that the letter specifically states that only the bid of the petitioners was rejected and they were not debarred from participating in any bid.

He categorically states that impugned letter dated 08.07.2020 (signed on 09.07.2020) is not to be considered as an order of debarment of the

petitioners from participating in any tender.

6.

In view of the above, it is held that the impugned letter dated 08.07.2020 (signed on 09.07.2020) shall be treated only as a letter of rejection of

petitioners’ bid and shall not be construed as an order of debarment of the petitioner from participation in any tender. Since the Respondent No. 1

by its letter dated 16.07.2020 has clarified that letter dated 08.07.2020 (signed on 09.07.2020) is only a letter of rejection of bid and not an order of

debarment, the challenge to rejection order dated 10.07.2020 is infructuous.

7.

Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

8.

Copy of the judgment be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through email.