Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/4029/2019 on 30 December 2019
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 4029 of 2019
Decided on: 30.12.2019 M/s Bhagwati Construction Company …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice. The Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Vinod Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General, with M/s. Adarsh K. Sharma, Ritta Goswami and Nand Lal Thakur, Additional Advocates General. L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice. (Oral) With the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, this case is being taken up for final disposal, at this stage. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. Respondent No. 3 issued etender notification, dated 7th October, 2019 (Annexure P1) inviting online bids for providing flood protection work in Saryali Khad from Talai to Bagroo in Tehsil Jhandutta, District Bilaspur, H.P. Condition No. 2(v) of the said tender notification stipulates that the latest Income Tax Clearance Certificate and Sales Tax/GST Clearance Certificate alongwith copy of PAN and copy of registration under H.P. Sales Tax Act 1968 and GST Act must be furnished/uploaded alongwith the tender application.
3. The case of the petitioner is that he had complied with the said condition and uploaded all the requisite documents, as required in terms of Condition No. 2 (v) and (vi) and was eligible for consideration of his tender application, but, the same has been rejected by the respondents by referring the reason that 'as per NIT condition No. 23(V) the GST clearance certificate was mandatory document to be uploaded with tender documents otherwise the tender was supposed to be rejected'.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has come to know that the tender application of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that monthwise GST Certificate was not uploaded with the tender application. It is further submitted that the respondents in para 5 of the reply have admitted that the case of the petitioner has been rejected for not uploading the GST Clearance Certificate for the month of March, 2019.
5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the rejection of the petitioner's tender application is on the ground that the petitioner had not uploaded the monthwise GST Clearance Certificate alongwith the tender application, whereas it is not required as per the tender notification (Annexure P1). What was required to be uploaded alongwith the tender application was the latest Income Tax Clearance Certificate and Sales Tax/GST Clearance Certificate alongwith copies of PAN and registration under H.P. Sales Tax Act 1968 and GST Act, which have been uploaded by the petitioner. Under these circumstances, it is submitted that there was no ground left to the respondents to reject the tender application of the petitioner.
6. Learned Additional Advocate General, while supporting the impugned action of the respondents in rejecting the tender application/technical bid of the petitioner, submitted that in terms of the tender notification, monthwise GST Clearance Certificate was required to be uploaded, but, the petitioner has not uploaded the same, hence, the respondents have rightly rejected the tender application of the petitioner.
7. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the record carefully.
8. It is worthwhile to record herein that the prospective bidders are required to furnish the relevant information/documents alongwith their tender form/ application in a particular manner, as reflected/required in terms of the tender notification and when such compliance has been made, it is not open for the authorities to reject the applications/bids for noncompliance of the condition(s) not mentioned or highlighted in the tender notification.
9. In the present case, the tender notification required the petitioner to upload certain particulars in terms of condition No. 2 (v), which the petitioner has done, but, the respondents have rejected the tender application of the petitioner for not uploading the monthwise GST Clearance Certificate alongwith the tender application, which condition was not specifically provided in the tender notification.
10. Petitioner can only be expected to comply with the conditions stipulated in the tender notification and in case the respondents require that tender application should be accompanied with monthwise GST Clearance Certificate, then the said condition should have been reflected in the tender notification itself. In the absence of such condition in the tender application, the action of the respondents in rejecting the tender application/technical bid of the petitioner is arbitrary, contrary to the tender notification and requires to be set aside.
11. Having said so, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to issue fresh tender notification highlighting therein all the documents/certificates required to be furnished at the time of uploading the tender application.
12. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed of accordingly. (L. Narayana Swamy) Chief Justice
(Jyotsna Rewal Dua) Judge December 30, 2019 ( rajni )