Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:6767-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 731 of 2025 1 - Vishesh Mittal S/o Krishna Gopal Mittal Aged About 27 Years Proprietor Of Pawan Hari Enterprises, R/o Ambikapur Road, Ward No. 7, Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Municipal Council, Katghora Through Its Chief Municipal Officer, Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council, Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Urban Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s) : :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Akhand Pratap, Advocate Mr. Shashank Thakur, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 06.02.2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of the System Tender No. 164561 NIT No. 108 with the following prayer:- (10.1) to quash and set aside the System Tender No 164561 NIT 2 No. 108 no (Annexure-P/1) issued by Respondents No. 1 and 2. (10.2) Direct the Respondents to rectify the tender notice and allow the petitioner to participate in the tender process without the requirement of experience certificates. (10.3) Pass any other order or direction as may be deemed fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a registered civil contractor in Category-D under the Public Works Department, C.G. Government. He obtained his registration certificate on 22.11.2024 as Category-D contractor. The registration of the petitioner in Category-D, itself enable him to participate in tenders for the value up to 1 Crore rupees. On 17.01.2025, the Municipal Council, Katghora issued a Tender Notice No. 164561 NIT No. 108 dated 17.01.2025 for extension of OPVC pipe line in Ward No. 1, 3, 7 and 9 at Municipal Council, Katghora and the value of the contract was Rs. 36.48 lakhs. The Clause 16 of the said NIT requires the experience certificate which shall be issued at least by executive engineer or above rank officer of 80% of bid amount of single work order, 60% of two work order and 40% of the three work order has been successfully executed by contractor. 3. The petitioner who is a newly registered firm under Category-D, it is impossible for him to provide experience certificate. In the Public Works Department, the Category-D contractors are not required to have prior experience as the same is designed as an entry level platform. It is also the case of the petitioner that previously the respondent No. 1 had issued tenders in which, the petitioner has participated and no experience certificate was demanded but now Clause-16 have been added in which the experience certificate has been demanded, therefore, the impugned tender notice may be quashed and the petitioner may be permitted to participate in the tender process without requirement of experience certificate. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the registration for Category-D was introduced to promote new contractors without prior experience. The imposition of Clause-16 in the NIT defeats this purpose. Earlier also, there was no condition in the NIT with respect to the experience but to keep away the petitioner from participating the 3 tender, such Clause 16 has been added which affects the petitioner’s right to practice trade and business and he is restricted without any reasonable justification, therefore, the impugned NIT may be quashed. 5. The learned State counsel has submitted that the requirement of experience certificate in Clause-16 of the NIT was added after approval and instructions of the department of Urban Administration looking to the nature of work because the nature of work is not the routine work rather requires experience and expertise as it involves the water supply system as well as chlorination of supply of water in concerned municipal area. There may be instances of leakage or proper flow and pressure of water in the pipe line installed by the contractor and to avoid the same the experience certificate is required. The supply of drinking water is a sensitive matter and the quality of work is not required to be compromised and the experienced contractor could have done it more efficiently. The requirement of the work experience in the extension or lying of the water supply system is a part of Jal Mission Project of Government of C.G. and the requirement of work experience is issued by the executive engineer department of Urban Administration, Government of C.G., therefore, the petitioner does not have any merits in this petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the document annexed with the petition. 7. The challenge in the present petition is the condition for experience certificate which is inserted in Clause-16 of the NIT. The claim of the petitioner is that, he is newly registered contractor of Category-D. The registration of Category-D contractor though introduced to promote new contractors but the fixation of the conditions in the NIT is the prerogative of the respondent authorities, looking to the nature of work and other surrounding circumstances, as submitted by the respondents that the work for which the NIT is issued relates to the supply of drinking water for which the extension and lying the pipe line is required, we cannot lost sight that the subject work is an important and relates to the public safety and health, it is required to be lying and extended through expert hand as there was every possibility of leakage or flow of the water which may affects the health of general public and 4 considering the said aspect of the matter, the condition have been imposed in the NIT with respect to the experience certificate which in the opinion of this Court cannot be said to be arbitrary or violative the principles of equality or fairness. The petitioner’s right to practice trade or business also does not affect by putting the said condition in NIT. We do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned condition of the NIT as the same does have bearing the necessary in the required work under the NIT. 8.
Decision
In view of the above, the writ petition filed by the petitioner lacks merit liable to be and hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Sagrika SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.02.17 10:15:36 +0530