Disposed

M/S Tharu and Sons v. Union of India

Karnataka HC6 Nov 2024WP/29519/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging disqualification in a tender for mechanized interior cleaning of coaches. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation correcting discrepancies in skilled and unskilled labor details per the tender corrigendum.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to submit representation to respondent No. 3 with corrected manpower details in accordance with the tender corrigendum.

M/S Tharu and Sons Vs Union of India — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:44614 WP No. 29519 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 29519 OF 2024 (GM-TEN)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

M/S. THARU AND SONS, KARIPAYI ROAD, RAJGIRI POST, SOUTH KALAMASSERY ERNAKULAM, KERALA STATE -683 104 A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI. ANTONY THARU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. BAPAT SAMPATH VINAYAKA RAO, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

UNION OF INDIA REP. BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, 3^RD FLOOR, EAST WING, RAIL SADAN, GADAG ROAD, HUBBALLI -580 020

¶12

Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, WORKS BRANCH, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, BENGALURU -560023

¶14

THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL MECHANICAL ENGINEER, SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER'S OFFICE, (THIRD FLOOR), BENGALURU -560 023

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. K. ARVIND KAMATH, ASG FOR SRI. CHANDRACHUD, CGSC)

¶17

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:44614 WP No. 29519 of 2024

¶20

RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER PETITIONERS FINANCIAL BID FOR EVALUATION OF THE TENDER BEARING BID NO. GEM/2024/B/5050352 DATED 02.07.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A, AND PASS SUCH FURTHER OR OTHER ORDERS AS THE HONBLE COURT AND ETC.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

In response to the tender document issued by respondent No. 3 inviting bids for providing Mechanized Interior Cleaning of Coaches, the petitioner submitted his bid. The technical bid submitted by the petitioner was accepted, and upon opening the financial bid, the petitioner was declared as L1 along with another bidder. Subsequently, following a representation by the petitioner, the Tender Accepting Authority directed the petitioner to provide the calculation of manpower costs. The petitioner submitted the calculation of manpower as per Annexure-D, detailing 317 persons, including skilled and unskilled laborers. However, the petitioner was not awarded the contract, citing that the details of the skilled and unskilled laborers furnished by the petitioner did not match those specified in the corrigendum dated 25.07.2024.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that liberty be granted to the petitioner to submit a representation

¶25

¶26

NC: 2024:KHC:44614 WP No. 29519 of 2024

¶27

to respondent No. 3, providing the correct details of the skilled and unskilled laborers.

¶28

Learned Additional Solicitor General, representing respondent No. 3, on accepting notice, argued that the details of the skilled and unskilled laborers furnished by the petitioner do not match the corrigendum dated 25.07.2024, and therefore, the petitioner has rightly been disqualified by the authorities.

¶29

Therefore, the petition stands disposed of, with liberty granted to the petitioner to submit a representation in accordance with the corrigendum issued by the authorities. If such representation is submitted, the respondent authorities shall consider it, subject to the provisions of law.

¶30

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶31

¶32

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23

M/S Tharu and Sons v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Tharu and Sons v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Rangaraju Vs Smt. Susheelamma

Mrs. Sharfunnissa Vs Mr. Adam Sab

Sri. Suresh Vs Sri. Puttaraju

Raghavendra Reddy Vs the State and Anr.

Kalappa a C Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri a Srinivas Vs Deputy Registrar