The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 21926 of 2025 Jay Durga Transport, Khurda …. Petitioner Represented by Adv.– Mr. Anjan Kumar Biswal, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Represented by Adv.– Mr. D. Tripathy, Addl. Govt. Advocate Mr. Samir Kumar Mishra, Senior Advocate along with Ms. P.S. Mohanty, Advocate W.P.(C) No. 21899 of 2025 Jay Durga Transport, Khurda …. Petitioner
Legal Reasoning
Represented by Adv.– Mr. Anjan Kumar Biswal, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Represented by Adv.– Mr. D. Tripathy, Addl. Govt. Advocate Mr. Samir Kumar Mishra, Senior Advocate along with Ms. P.S. Mohanty, Advocate W.P.(C) No. 21902 of 2025 Jay Durga Transport, Khurda …. Petitioner Represented by Adv.– Mr. Anjan Kumar Biswal, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Represented by Adv.– Mr. D. Tripathy, Addl. Govt. Advocate Page 1 of 7 Mr. Samir Kumar Mishra, Senior Advocate along with Ms. P.S. Mohanty, Advocate CORAM: HON’ BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No.
Decision
ORDER 07.08.2025 01. 1. Since the issues involved in all these writ petitions are similar, the said petitions are taken up together and disposed of by this common order. 2. Pursuant to the tender floated for selection and appointment of a Level-II Contractor for transport of Custom Milled Rice (CMR) from Rice Receiving Centers (RRC) to the retail centers of different blocks, the petitioner submitted its bid for blocks and municipalities namely Bhubaneswar Block, Jatni Block as well as Jatni Municipality and Khurda Municipality. The tender conditions provides that the bid shall be considered at the technical stage first and in the event the bidder is found eligible having correctly submitted the bid, shall be entitled to participate at the financial bid stage. Unfortunately, the bid of the petitioner is rejected at the technical bid stage on the ground that the petitioner has filed a case Page 2 of 7 against the Odisha State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. (in short, ‘Corporation/OSCSC’) being W.P.(C) No.2185 of 2023 which is still pending and in view of clause 5.6 of the conditions of the disqualification as mentioned in the bid document, it is otherwise disqualified. So far as the tender relating to Jatni Block is concerned, the name of the RRC is wrongly written as CWC Jatni and, therefore, on the ground of such discrepancy, the said bid was rejected. 3. It is beyond cavil of doubt that the tender documents are expressive and clear that in the event any discrepancy is noticed in the bid document, the said bid document shall be liable to be cancelled and/or rejected. The clarity and precision in submitting the bid document is required to be ensured and if it is not in conformity with the terms and conditions of the tender, there is no difficulty on the part of the authority in rejecting the same. It is manifest from the stand taken by the committee that so far as the bid for Jatni Block is concerned, the discrepancy is noticed and, therefore, the rejection can be made on such ground. It is no longer res integra that the moment the terms and conditions are incorporated in the tender documents, the participants have to adhere such terms and conditions and in the event any departure is seen therefrom, we don’t find any incongruity Page 3 of 7 on the part of the committee to reject the said bid. Since the bid was invited for different units/blocks, the other bids which are in conformity with the terms and conditions of the said tender document cannot be rejected in a uniform basis which we also perceived in the instant case that the other two bids were rejected solely on the ground of filing a writ petition before this Court and applying a disqualification clause (clause 5.6 of the tender document). We had an occasion to notice the said clause, which is reproduced as under: “5.6 Corporation reserves the right not to consider any person/firm/company having any dispute with OSCSC or whose operation is found unsuccessful by the Corporation during his previous assignment in order to protect its interest.” 4. The bare reading of the language used in the above- mentioned clause leaves no ambiguity that the Corporation reserves right not to consider any person/firm/company, if such person/firm/ company has any dispute with the OSCSC or his/its performance was unsatisfactory in relation to the previous assignment. The said clause can be bifurcated into two components; first component relates to disqualification in the event any dispute exists with the OSCSC and second component is relatable to an unsatisfactory performance in the previous assignment. The narration given by the Committee does not Page 4 of 7 relate to the second component of the said clause but is referable to the first component as the petitioner filed the writ petition against the OSCSC ventilating his grievance where no nexus can be attached to other mode of disqualification namely, blacklisting or debarment. In the event the petitioner is blacklisted or debarred in participating in the tender and the challenge is made to the Constitutional Court then in absence of any order of stay or any order which may permit the petitioner to participate, such disqualification continues unless the order of blacklisting or debarment is interfered with and set aside by the Court. 5. We do not find any such facts emanating from the record as the Committee proceeded simplicitor on the basis that a case is filed by the petitioner before the High Court against the said Corporation and, therefore, clause 5.6 gets immediately attracted. The terms and conditions embodied in the tender document partakes a character of a concluded contract in the event the intending bidder participates and accepts those conditions and, therefore, such condition must withstand on the parameter of the legality or on the fundamental policy of India. Any condition which is forbidden by the Act is unconscionable and contrary to laws of the country and, therefore, Page 5 of 7 such conditions cannot be activated nor be applied. It is a constitutional right bestowed upon a citizen of the country, who approached the constitutional Bench to ventilate his grievance which has a public element. The right to approach the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is a constitutional right which cannot be abridged or curtailed through an executive fiat. It is regarded as a basic structure of the Constitution which cannot be taken away either by executive or by legislative exercise of powers in L. Chandra Kumar Vs. Union of India and Others reported in (1997) 3 SCC 261. 6. It is inconceivable that a person has approached the Court asserting his right and seeking relief therefrom shall have to suffer for such action and if such clause is interpreted in the said manner, it castigate such person and impunity is attached to participate in the tender process. What we find from the expressions and/or the language used in clause 5.6 is that the dispute must be referable to such a dispute, which creates any fetter and/or obstacle in the person in participating in the tender process and not when the person has approached the forum provided under law to redress his/its grievance or adjudication of the disputes. We therefore, do not find that the Page 6 of 7 stand of the Committee to be just, reasonable and rational so far as its invocation of clause 5.6 is concerned. The order of disqualification so far as the other two units are concerned, except Jatni Block is hereby quashed and set aside. Since no other error was found by the technical committee, the petitioner’s bid shall be considered for the financial bids and it is open to the authority to take a decision on the basis of the price quoted by each of the bidders. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petitions are disposed of. Judge (Harish Tandon) Chief Justice (M.S. Raman) S.K. Jena/Secy. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANJAY KUMAR JENA Designation: SECRETARY Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 11-Aug-2025 17:28:42 Page 7 of 7