Disposed

K L Technical Services v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Mar 2024WP/37299/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging acceptance of the 5th respondent's bid in a reverse tendering process for mechanized cleaning and housekeeping at Simhachalam Devasthanam, allegedly contrary to tender condition No.XXIII. The court directed respondents 3 and 4 to consider both bidders strictly per the tender document and the petitioner's representation before finalizing and declaring the LI bidder within

What the court decided

AI extract

K L Technical Services Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

.X
r

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 37299 OF 2022

¶6

Between:

¶7

K L Technical Services, A partnership firm, having its registered office At 1- 8-304 to 307/9, Road No.1, Patigadda, Road, Secunderabad^andBranch Office at G1,Kranthi Apartments, Mogalrajupuram, Vijayawada, Krishna District. Rep. by its Managing Partner, V.Sreedhar Babu, S/o. V.Laxman Rao, Aged about 54 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Hyderabad.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Endowments Department, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶11

The Commissioner of Endowments, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Vijayawada, Krishna District.

¶12

Sri Varaha Laxmi Narasimha Swamy Devasthanam, Simhachalam, Visakhapatnam District. Rep. by its Executive Officer.

¶13

The Executive Officer, Sri Varaha Laxmi Narasimha Swamy

¶14

Devasthanam, Simhachalam, Visakhapatnam District.

¶15

Scotland Security Services, Having its office at Flat No.204, Pragathi Complex, Garagaparru Road, Near Railway Gate, Bheemavaram, Andhra Pradesh -534202. Branch Office at 1-86-4/2, Flat No. 134, Sector No.4, MVP Colony, Visakhapatnam -530017. Rep. by its Managing Partner.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India^{prayingthatin} the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{theHighCourtmay} be pleased to issue a writ mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the 4'^ respondent^{inacceptingthebidof} the, 5^'^ respondent in pursuance of the Tender Notice^{No.B4/3932/2021} SVLNSD/Mechanized cleaning and housekeeping sanitation^atuphilland downhill to the 5th respondent even though the bid^{ofthe5threspondentis} contrary to condition No. XXIII of reverse tendering^processas illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 4**^ respondent^{toissuefreshtender} notice or to conduct reverse bidding among the bidders. lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ^{petition,theHighCourt} may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including^{awardofworkin} of the tender notification No.B4/3932/2021 dated 24.08.2022 pursuance SVLNSD/Mechanized cleaning and housekeeping sanitation^atuphilland downhill to the 5^^ respondent pending disposal of^theWP.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. O. M. R. LAW FIRM

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 4: SRI JAGADISH^KUMAR

¶21

BATCHU, SC FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI G.R. SUDHAKAR The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

[3233]

¶24

APHC010624362022

¶25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶26

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶27

TUESDAY .THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH

¶28

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶29

PRESENT

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶31

WRIT PETITION NO: 37299/2022

¶32

Between:

¶33

K L Technical Services

¶34

...PETITIONER

¶35

AND

¶36

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶37

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶38

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶39

1.0 MR LAW FIRM

¶40

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶41

1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶42

2.JAGADISH KUAMAR BATCHU

¶43

3.JAGADISH KUAMAR BATCHU

¶44

4.G RSUDHAKAR

¶45

The Court made the following Order:

¶46

Heard Sri O. Manohar Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel^forthe

¶47

petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent^Nos.3and 4 and the learned counsel appearing for the 5^^ respondent.

¶48

¶49

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the 4th respondent accepting the bid of the 5* respondent in pursuance of the Tender Notice No.B4/3932/2021 SVLNSD/Mechanized cleaning^and housekeeping sanitation at uphill and downhill to the 5* respondent even though the bid of the 5th respondent is contrary^{tothecondition} No.XXlIl of reverse tendering process.

¶50

The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits^thatthe 3td respondent issued the tender document for the work of mechanized cleaning and housekeeping sanitation at uphill and downhill in the Devasthanam for a period of two years, This tender document is in online version, the downloading of the^biddocument started on 24.08.2022 at 06.00 P.M. The details are given from serial Nos.l to 24 in the said tender document and the procedure^forbid submission on E-procurement Platform (e Tendering) was also annexed to the said tender document. The tender conditions were also annexed to the said document. It also contemplates reverse tendering process. The petitioner and the S^h respondent^became eligible under the above said tender for participation in the reverse tendering process. The Condition Nos. 15 to 24 is relevant for the purpose of this case for the steps to be taken in the reverse tendering process which are as under:

¶51

(xv) To conduct the reverse tender process at least two bidders would be required.

¶52

(xvi) The LI Price Offer (Initial) shall be the maximum allowable Bid price for the reverse tendering process.

¶53

(xvii) Only one round of reverse tendering shall be carried out i n which bidders can revise their bids multiple times within the time limits specified.

¶54

(xviii) At the start of the Reverse Tendering process the Maximum Allowable Bid Price will be set and bidders shall submit their bids in an online platfor^m.

¶55

(xix) Names of the bidders / vendors shall be anonymously masked in the Reverse Tendering process and vendors will be given suitable dummy names.

¶56

(xx) The initial period of the Reverse tendering process^will start after 3 hours, following which there will be auto extensions of time by 15 minutes in case of any reduction in bids recorded in the prior 15 minutes.

¶57

(xxi) Only the current LI bid shall be visible to all bidders who may revise their bids until the end of the process.

¶58

(xxii) Decrements made in each subsequent bid shall not be less than 0.5% of the IBM/ECV uploaded.

¶59

(xxiii) The Commission charges shall not be more than 5% (0% of Administrative charge shall not be acceptable) of the Total Pay (Basic pay + VDA) wage to be paid each person as mentioned at column no.3 of the schedule.

¶60

(xxiv) The LI bid may be determined following a period of inactivity of more than 15 minutes of reverse bidding^afterthe initial 3 hour period after closure of the main bidding.

¶61

The learned counsel for the petitioner specifically^referstothe condition Nos.20 to 24 and he specifically pleads that, the petitioner did not get the opportunity as the 5th respondent continuously^clicked the button by quoting the lowest price that would be accepted by the system. Due to the technical bid the petitioner could not continue in the system on the date of reverse tendering process to quote further the lowest price. Then the petitioner brought to the notice of the 4th respondent vide letter dated 12.11.2022 itself as the reverse tendering process was held on 09.11.2022. Even on the very same day, the petitioner sent mail dated 09.11.2022 to the 4th respondent^herein about the difficulty faced by it in the said reverse tendering process. But the 4th respondent did not consider the said representation and

¶62

¶63

proceeded with the 5^^ respondent as it became the LI bidder. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition was filed.

¶64

On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel relying^upon the counter affidavit of the respondent Nos.3 and 4^{submitsthatafter} completion of scrutiny and finalization of the qualified^{bidders,price} bid was opened on 03.11.2022 and found that in e-procurement platform two bidders equally quoted the rate at Rs.^{12153.219000.As} per the e-procurement conditions, the price bid annual^{turnovershall} be more than one crore and as such, the qualified bidders^forreverse tender auction, which was fixed on 09.11.2022. The time bound fixed from 10.30 AM to 1.30 PM on 09.11.2022 to program was participate in the reverse tendering process by the^{qualifiedbidders} i.e., the petitioner and the 5th respondent. The respondentDevasthanam fixed the cut of price of Rs.50/- for one click for the tendering process. Accordingly, e-procurement reverse^{tenderauction} was conducted on 09.11.2022. After completion of the time^bound program of the same, the e-procurement platform shows^thatthe5th respondent became the LI bidder by quoting the rate of Rs.3.22 month which is not less than zero percent (0%). The commission per petitioner is an existing tenderer for maintenance of Mechanized Cleaning in the respondent-Devasthanam.

¶65

¶66

It is also aware of participation in the e-procurement tender process and reverse tendering auction as an existing bidder. Hence, found fault with the procedure adopted by the respondentDevasthanam or with the procedure contemplated as per the tender document.

¶67

The 5th respondent also filed i Its counter affidavit and relying upon the same, the learned counsel for the 5th respondent submits that the petitioner has participated pursuant to the above said tender notification and it has got ample knowledge with regard to the participation in the reverse tendering process also, The 5th respondent is declared as successful bidder against the tender notification vide Tender No.B4/2676/Man Power/SVLNSD/22 for providing supply of

¶68

man power to the respondent-Devasthanam and it could not succeed in respect of the other tender notifications issued by the Devasthanam.

¶69

Since the 5th respondent quoted the rate of Rs.3.22 Commission per month which is not less than 0% became the LI bidder in the e-procurement reverse tendering process. The 5* respondent already deposited a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- on 30.08.2022 towards EMD and in view of the pendency of this writ petition, the subject tender has not been finalized though the 5th respondent became the LI bidder.

¶70

¶71

The learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent also submits that, the petitioner joined lately in the reverse tendering process through online as it is evident from the screen shots enclosed to the representation of the petitioner itself. The 5th respondent participated in the said tendering process from 10.30 AM onwards and quoted successful lowest bid amount as it was permissible^tothe 5th respondent thereon.

¶72

In view of the above said rival contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the 5* respondent, the terms of the tender document under reverse tendering process are so relevant and pertinent to be valid by the respondent Nos.3 and 4. As the Conditions from 20 to 24 are so relevant for the facts of this case, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 are directed to consider the case of the petitioner and the 5th respondent strictly in terms of the tender document and the representation of the petitioner can also be considered in the light of the above said tender document and the finalization shall be made accordingly and the LI bidder shall be declared and tender shall be given in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible within a period of two (02)^weeksfromthe date of receipt of this order.

¶73

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There^shallbe no order as to costs.

¶74

¶75

As a sequel. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

SOI- M PRABHAKAR RAO

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Principal Secretary, Endowments Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶83

The Commissioner of Endowments, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Vijayawada, Krishna District.

¶84

The Executive Officer, Sri Varaha Laxmi Narasimha Swamy

¶85

Devasthanam, Simhachalam, Visakhapatnam District.

¶86

The Executive Officer Sri Varaha Laxmi Narasimha Swamy

¶87

Devasthanam, Simhachalam, Visakhapatnam District.

¶88

The Managing Partner, Scotland Security Services, Having its office at Flat No.204, Pragathi Complex, Garagaparru Road, Near Railway Gate, Bheemavaram, Andhra Pradesh-534202 Branch Office at 1-86-4/2, Flat

¶89

No. 134, Sector No.4, MVP Colony, Visakhapatnam -530017.

¶90

One CC to M/s OMR Law Firm, Advocate [OPUC]

¶91

One CC to Sri O. Manohar Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]

¶92

One CC to Sri Jagadish Kumar Batchu, SC for Endowments [OPUC]

¶93

One CC to Sri G.R. Sudhakar, Advocate [OPUC]s

¶94

Two CCs to GP for Endowments, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶95

Three CD Copies

Ssb

MBT

HIGH COURT

DATED: 19/03/2024

ORDER

WP.No.37299 of 2022

OF ANo;^
C3'<br>2 5 JUN 20211 m
C!»
11
^ Current Section . /
0.a ■?; PATCHtPjsSf^

¶103

DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS

K L Technical Services v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

K L Technical Services v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Kavitha and Manasa Agencies, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Malineni Chandra Shekar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Dasari Venkata Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Panchada Krishna Vs the Union of India

Ravuri Eshwaraiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

S. Chandramouli, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh