1 - M/s Srishti Construction (Jv) Having Its Head Office At Near Railway Station v. 1 - South Eatern Coalfields Limited Mini Ratna Company Subsidry Of Coal India Limited
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:4876-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 526 of 2025 1 - M/s Srishti Construction (Jv) Having Its Head Office At Near Railway Station, Champa, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Through One Of The Partner And Authorized Representative Namish Bhojasiya, S/o Shri Rajendra Kumar Bhojasiya, Aged 43 Years, One Of The Partner Of Srishti Constructions, R/o 002, B Block, Maruti Life Style, Kota Road, Mohaba Bazar, Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - South Eatern Coalfields Limited Mini Ratna Company Subsidry Of Coal India Limited Through The Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Secl Bhawan, Sipat Road, Sarkanda, Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - General Manager (Cmc) (Tender Inviting Authority) South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Secl Bhawan, Sipat Road, Sarkanda, Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s) : :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, Advocate Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate Division Bench: Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 28 .01.2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition against the order dated 07/01/2025 passed by the respondents and claimed the following reliefs:- 2 1. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 07.01.2025 passed by the respondents bearing no. SECL/BSP/CMC/e-Tender-TK/JHL/NIT-605/2024-25/870 (Annexure-P/1) 2. That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the rejection of the Technical Bid of the petitioner on 03.10.2024 by the respondent No. 2. 3. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to directed the respondents to declare the petitioner has technically qualified and opening the price bid of the petitioner in pursuance of the e-Tender Notice bearing NIT No. SECL/BSP/CMC/e-Tender-TK/JHL/NIT-605 dated 29.02.2024. 4. Any other relief(s)/order(s)/ direction(s) in favour of petitioner, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice. 5. Cost of the petition. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent no. 1 has issued an online tender for work of planning, design, engineering, construction, fabrication, supply, erection, trial run and commissioning of 2X2.5 MVA, 3kV/3.3kV substation including all the electrical outdoor and indoor equipments, lightening protection system, earthing system, DG set, firefighting system, structural and civil works etc. The said work was also includes operation and maintenance during defect liability period of 60 months on Turnkey Basis at Kanchan OCP, Johilla Area, SECL. 3. The petitioner being the eligible candidate as per the terms and conditions of the e-Tender notice dated 29/02/2024 as submitted the tender before respondent No. 1. On 03/10/2024, the tender committee has rejected the technical bid of the petitioner along with the other bidders on the ground that the petitioner has not fulfilled the NIT requirement No. 1 sub head of working capital. It is further the case of the petitioner that the petitioner being a joint venture has submitted his certificate of working capital issued by a C.A. but on the arbitrary ground the technical bid of the petitioner has been rejected by the respondent No. 1. Earlier, the petitioner had
Decision
filed the WPC No. 5360/2024 before this Court which was disposed of vide order dated 05/11/2024 in view of the opinion of the IEMS dated 26/10/2024 in which certain recommendations have been made and the same is to be approved in view 3 of the circular issued by the Central Vigilance Commission dated 14/06/2023 and the said decision would be taken by the authority concerned within a week. Thereafter, the respondents have again passed an order and decided not to open the price bid of the petitioner as he has not submitted the working capital certificate within three months prior to the date of opening of the tender as mentioned in the NIT, therefore, the petitioner has filed the present petition claiming the aforesaid relief. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent has rejected the bid of the petitioner by invoking the clause which is not applicable in the case and the petitioner has submitted the requisite documents as per the terms and conditions of the e-Tender notice dated 29/02/2024. The respondents are not adhering to the terms and conditions of the NIT. For the joint venture, the requirement of working capital certification is the certificate of working capital issued by a practicing C.A. having the membership with the institute of C.A. of India with UDIN number. which the petitioner has filed along with his bid, yet the respondents authorities have rejected the technical bid of the petitioner. Therefore, the petition may be allowed and the respondent authorities may be directed to open the bid of the petitioner and quash the rejection of technical bid. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent SECL would submit that the requirement to submit the working capital certificate is prior to the date of opening of the tender but the petitioner has not submitted the document as per the conditions of the tender. He would further submit that the petitioner was required to submit the working capital certificate for the period in between 19/01/2024 to 18/04/2024 but the petitioner had submitted his working capital certificate issued on 12.12.2023 which is not the period for which the certificate was required. Therefore, their technical bid was rejected and since the petitioner has failed to submit the requisite document along with their tender form, their price bid has also not been opened and therefore, there is no merit in the present case and the same is liable to be dismissed. 4 6. The parties are not disputed that the working capital certificate for the period between 19.01.2024 to 18.04.2024 was required to be submitted by the bidder along with the tender form and at the time of its submission. The petitioner has submitted the working capital certificate issued on 12.12.2023 which is much prior to the period for which the working capital certificate was required and as per the technical bid evolution summary annexed along with the petition (annexure-P/2), the petitioner has submitted the working capital certificate as mentioned in WCC against short fall document on 17/07/2024. The relevant portion of Clause 8-C of the e-Tender notice pertains to the date of issue of working capital certificate which is quoted hereinbelow:- “The Bidder must submit the certificate of possessing adequate working capital (at least 20% of the “Annualized value or Estimated value whichever is less” of this work) inclusive of access to lines of credit and availability of other financial resources to meet the requirement, issued by a Practicing Chartered Accountant having a Membership Number with institute of Chartered Accountants of India. Such certificate should contain the Unique Document Identification Number (UDIN). The bidder should possess the working capital issued within three months prior to the date of opening of tender.” 7. As per the Clause-8C of the e-Tender notice, the petitioner was required to submit his working capital certificate issued in between the period of 19/01/2024 to 18/04/2024 but he has not submitted the said working capital certificate issued within 19/01/2024 to 18/04/2024 and for that the respondent No. 1 has considered that the petitioner has not fulfilled the NIT requirement under the subhead of working capital and disqualified the petitioner. 8. Though, the matter was taken up by IEM and the said IEM has found that there is no clarity in NIT regarding the date for which the working capital should be calculated by the certifying C.A. If It is really so clear to SECL, they should have used a language similar to the one as highlighted at Para 4 G of the NIT. 9. Be that as it may, when the petitioner has not filed the requisite working capital certificate as per the terms of the NIT issued 3 months prior to the date of opening of the tender, rejection of his technical bid cannot be hold to be arbitrary or illegal. The petitioner ought to have submit the requisite certificate at the time of 5 submission of his tender form in which he has not satisfied the requirement of the NIT. We therefore, not inclined to allow the petition. 10. In view of the above, we do not fine any infirmity or perversity of the order dated 07/01/2025 passed by the respondent SECL and the present petition is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 11. No Cost(s). Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Sagrika SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.02.17 10:14:15 +0530