Petitioner sought judicial relief regarding rejection of its tender bid and challenged tender clauses excluding MSMEs from bid security. The court held the petition dismissed as the tender was cancelled on administrative grounds post-filing.
Relief sought was granted by dismissing the petition as the impugned tender has been cancelled.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPC No. 695 of 2023
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi-110011, District : New Delhi, Delhi
2. All India Institute Of Medical Sciences Raipur Through Its Director, Gate No. 1, Great Eastern Rd, Opposite Gurudwara, Aiims Campus Tatibandh, Raipur 492099, Chhattisgarh
3. Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Finance Department Of Expenditure, 3rd Floor Jeevan Deep Building Sansad Marg New Delhi 110001, District : New Delhi, Delhi
---- Respondent
(Cause Title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner : Mr. Anand Mohan Tiwari, Advocate (through Video-conferencing) For Respondent : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Deputy Solicitor General
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon’ble Mr. N.K.Chandravanshi, Judge
Order on Board
Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
07/08 /2023
1. The petitioner has filed this petition for the following reliefs:
2
“10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to call for the entire records of the case for its kind perusal in the interest of justice.
10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct respondent no. 2 (AIIMS Raipur) to consider the bid submitted by the petitioner and not to reject it summarily on the ground that the bid security amount i.c. earnest money of Rs 10,00,000 (Tens Lakhs) has not been submitted by the petitioner with its bid document.
10.3 That the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction to set aside and quash clause 27 (a) of the Notice Inviting Tender dated 22.11.2022 which provides for summarily rejecting the bid if the same does not consist of earnest money of Rs 10,00,000.
10.4 That the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to extend the benefit of exemption from depositing bid security amount as given or provided to the MSME bidders under the provision of Rule 170 (i) under Chapter 6 of General Financial Rules 2017 under the head of Bid Security. Or alternatively,
That the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to declare and hold that Rule 170 (i) under Chapter 6 of General Financial Rules 2017 under the head of Bid Security being ultra vires to the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 and constitution of India as null and void and quash the same and/or in the alternative read down the said Rule to include the Petitioner to be entitled to such exemption.
10.5 Any other relief/s which this Court deems fit and proper also may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner.”
3
2. The petitioner has preferred the instant petition against the Technical Corrigendum issued by Respondent No. 2 under memo NoAIIMS/R/HS/FOOD_Services/2022/RC dated 23.12.2022 in which the MSME units have been exempted from payment of bid security i.e., Rs 10,00,000/ (Ten Lakhs) while participating in Tender (Id 2022 IMSRP725013 namely "Three Year Rate contract for Outsourcing of Hospital Dietary/Catering Services for IPD in Hospital at AIIMS Raipur published on 22.11.2022"), whereas the other registered Self-Help Groups like the petitioner's bid will be summarily rejected in the absence of furnishing of bid security. Therefore respondents violated the constitutional provisions enshrined in Articles 14, 19 and 38 of the Constitution as the same does not fall under the doctrine of reasonable classification. Therefore, the petitioner also seeks to challenge the order dated 17.01.2023 issued by Respondent No.2 refusing to extend the benefit of the above-mentioned Technical Corrigendum to the petitioner. Even otherwise, the petitioner qualifies as small/micro enterprise fulfilling the qualification of micro-enterprise as it has equipment and investment of less than Rs. One crore. If the Petitioner is not granted the same benefits as granted to Small and Micro Enterprises, then the Corrigendum AIIMS/R/HS/FOOD Service/2022/ RC/ Dated 23.12.2022 and despite knowing the fact that the petitioner's SHGs also comes under the definition of the microenterprise but on the basis of the provision of rule 170(1) of General Financial Rule 2017 passed an order dated 17.01.2023 issued by Respondent No.2 refusing to extend the benefit of the above-mentioned Technical Corrigendum to the Petitioner itself is liable to be quashed as ultra vires the Constitution.
4
3. At the very outset, Mr. Ramakant Mishra, learned Deputy Solicitor General appearing for the respondents, relying on the counter-affidavit filed on 07.08.2023, submits that the tender in question has been cancelled on 22.02.2023 due to administrative reasons, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure R-2/1 and in view of the same, this petition has been rendered infructuous.
4. In view of the above submission, this petition is dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to law if it is aggrieved by cancellation of the NIT.
Sd/Sd/- (N.K.Chandravanshi) (Ramesh Sinha) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Amit
Mahila Sakhi Saheli Samiti Durg
Union Of India
All India Institute Of Medical Sciences Raipur
Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Finance
Ramesh Sinha
N.K. Chandravanshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
