In this tender dispute, the High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed a writ petition. The court held that the department was justified in rejecting the petitioner's bid for failing to submit the specified Aadhaar 2.0 Compliance Certificate, as no clarification was permissible for missing mandatory documents.
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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 5562 of 2022
Decided on: 12th December, 2022
M/S Linkwell Tele Systems Private Limited
…Petitioner Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & Others ….Respondents
Coram
The Hon’ble Ms. Justice Sabina, Judge.
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner : Mr. B.C. Negi, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Nitin Thakur, Advocate.
For respondents No. : Mr. Ashwani Sharma, Additional 1& 2. Advocate General.
For the respondent No.3 : Mr. Sanjeev Bushan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Chauhan, Advocate.
Sabina , Judge, (Oral)
O R D E R
The petitioner has filed the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs:-
2
(II) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash and set aside the said award issued in favour of Respondent No.3 by Respondent No.1 & 2; and /or
(III) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash and set aside the financial bid of Respondent No.3 declared by Respondent No.1 and 2 and opened vide letter dated 24.05.2022; and/or (iv) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 & 2 to place on record the reason for rejecting the bid of Petitioner; and /or
(v) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash and set aside the reasons for rejecting the bid of Petitioner if the same are illegal; and/or
(vi) Issue a writ of mandamus to issue the letter of award in favour of Petitioner after opening and accepting the financial bid of the Petitioner; and/or
(vii) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash and set aside the entire tender process; and /or
(viii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 & 2 to re-advertise the tender in question; and/or
3
the petitioner regarding the online submitted documents. However, without asking for any clarification the tender bid of the petitioner has been rejected, at the technical stage. No objection was raised at the prequalification stage by the Department.
4
been attached by the petitioner as there was no ambiguity in the documents submitted by the petitioner.
Pending miscellaneous application(s) if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Sabina) Judge
(Sushil Kukreja) Judge
December 12, 2022 (Gaurav)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the tender petitioner could seek clarification to rectify missing technical documents and thereby challenge the rejection of the bid.
Whether the department was justified in rejecting the petitioner's tender bid for failure to submit Aadhaar 2.0 Compliance Certification.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/S Linkwell Tele Systems Private Limited
State of Himachal Pradesh
Sabina
Sushil Kukreja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
