Disposed

M/S Sakshi Computers v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Jul 2024CW/1416/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging approval of rates granted to a rival bidder in a Nagar Nigam Kota tender. Counsel conceded the impugned order was appealable under Section 38 of the Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Act, 2012 and did not press the petition; the court disposed of it granting liberty to appeal.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to challenge the impugned order before the Appellate Authority under Section 38 of the Act of 2012; stay and pending applications disposed of.

M/S Sakshi Computers Vs State of Rajasthan — Public Procurement and Tenders | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:27331]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1416/2024

¶4

M/s Sakshi Computers, Through Its Proprietor Amit Sen S/o Shri Brij Mohan Sen Aged Around 41 Years, R/o House No. 255, Ram Janki Mandir Road, Keshavpura, Kota, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Department Of Local Self Government, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

Director, Department Of Local Bodies, G-3 Raj Mahal Residency, C-Scheme, Jaipur.

¶9

Office Of Nagar Nigam Kota (South), Through Its Commissioner, Administrative Block, Rajeev Gandhi Bhawan, Dashara Maidan, Kota Rajasthan.

¶10

M/s Hada Computers And Zerox, Hada Bawan, Near Central Bank, Main Road, Kunhadi, Kota Rajasthan. Through Its Proprietor.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Himanshu Jain For Respondent(s) :

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

¶14

Order

¶15

02/07/2024

¶16

Petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, by way of filing instant petition, in order to challenge the order dated 06.10.2023 (Ann-1) passed by the Authorized Officer, General Store, Nagar Nigam, Kota South, granting approval to rates furnished by the private respondent No.4, pursuant to tender notice dated 01.08.2023 for providing the Computer Operator in the Nigam.

¶17

During course of argument, counsel for petitioner does not dispute that the order impugned passed by the authority is appealable within a period of 10 days before the Director,

(2 of 4)

[2024:RJ-JP:27331]

[CW-1416/2024]

Department of Local Bodies by virtue of Section 38 of the Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2012”) which reads as under:-

¶22

“38. Appeals.- (1) Subject to section 40, if any bidder or prospective bidder is aggrieved that any decision, action or omission of the procuring entity is in contravention to the provisions of this Act or the rules or guidelines issued thereunder, he may file an appeal to such officer of the procuring entity, as may be designated by it for the purpose, within a period of ten days or such other period as may be specified in the pre-qualification documents, bidder registration documents or bidding documents, as the case may be, from the date of such decision or action, omission, as the case may be, clearly giving the specific ground or grounds on which he feels aggrieved.

¶23

Provided that after the declaration of a bidder as successful in terms of section 27, the appeal may be filed only by a bidder who has participated in procurement proceedings:

¶24

Provided further that in case a procuring entity evaluates the technical bid before the opening of the financial bid, an appeal related to the matter of financial bid may be filed only by a bidder whose technical bid is found to be acceptable.

¶25

(2) On receipt of an appeal under sub-section (1), the officer designated under that sub-section shall, after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the parties, determine as to whether or not the procuring entity has complied with the provisions of this Act, the rules and guidelines made thereunder and the terms of the prequalification documents, bidder registration documents or bidding documents, as the case may be, and pass an order accordingly which shall, subject to the order passed under sub-section (5), be final and binding on the parties to the appeal.

¶26

(3) The officer to whom an appeal is filed under subsection (1) shall deal with the appeal as expeditiously as possible and shall endeavour to dispose it of within thirty days from the date of filing of the appeal.

¶27

(4) If the officer designated under sub-section (1) fails to dispose of the appeal filed under that sub-section within the period specified in sub-section (3), or if the bidder or prospective bidder or the procuring entity is aggrieved by the order passed under subsection (2), the bidder or prospective bidder or the procuring entity, as the case may be, may file a second appeal to an officer or authority designated by the State Government in this behalf within fifteen days from the expiry of the period specified in sub-

(3 of 4)

[2024:RJ-JP:27331]

[CW-1416/2024]

section (3) or of the date of receipt of the order passed under sub-section (2), as the case may be.

¶32

(5) On receipt of an appeal under sub-section (4), the officer or authority designated under that sub-section shall, after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the parties, determine as to whether or not the procuring entity has complied with the provisions of this Act, the rules and guidelines made thereunder and the terms of the pre-qualification documents, bidder registration documents or bidding documents, as the case may be, and pass an order accordingly which shall be final and binding on the parties to the appeal.

¶33

(6) The officer or authority to which an appeal is filed under sub-section (4) shall deal with the appeal as expeditiously as possible and shall endeavour to dispose it of within thirty days from the date of filing of the appeal:

¶34

Provided that if the officer or authority to which an appeal is filed under sub-section (4) is unable to dispose of the appeal within the aforesaid period, he shall record reason for the same.

¶35

(7) The officer or authority to which an appeal may be filed under sub-section (1) or (4) shall be indicated in the pre-qualification documents, bidder registration documents or bidding documents, as the case may be.

¶36

(8) Every appeal under sub-sections (1) and (4) shall be filed in such form and manner and shall be accompanied by such fee as may be prescribed.

¶37

(9) While hearing an appeal under this section, the officer or authority concerned shall follow such rules of procedure as may be prescribed.

¶38

(10) No information which would impair the protection of essential security interests of India, or impede the enforcement of law or fair competition, or prejudice the legitimate commercial interests of the bidder or the procuring entity, shall be disclosed in a proceeding under this section.”

¶39

In addition to above, counsel for petitioner is fair enough to point out before this Court that another writ petition being SB Civil Writ Petition No.1845/2024 was filed by the petitioner in respect of an another order, accepting another tender notice by the same authority, which has been disposed of by the Coordinate Bench of this High Court vide order dated 16.02.2024, leaving it open to

(4 of 4)

[2024:RJ-JP:27331]

[CW-1416/2024]

the petitioner to avail the alternative statutory remedy of appeal in view of Section 38 of the Act of 2012.

¶44

In view of above, counsel for petitioner does not press this writ petition on merits and seeks liberty to assail the impugned order before the Appellate Authority under Section 38 of the Act of 2012.

¶45

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty as prayed for.

¶46

Needless to observe that in case, any appeal is filed, the Appellate Authority shall consider the same in accordance with law.

¶47

Stay application and other pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶48

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

¶49

NITIN /18

M/S Sakshi Computers v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Sakshi Computers v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jodhraj S/O Bhairulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt Vanita Sethi and Anr. Vs Addi Civil Judge and Ors.

Keshav Prasad Son of Shri R.R.S Prasad Vs Smt. Bhagwant Kaur Wife of S. Niranjan Malik

Bindu Chaudhary W/O Sh. Ramesh Chaudhary Vs Manoj Swami S/O Shri Tara Chand Swami

Mahendra Jain S/O Late Shri Chiranji Lal Jain Vs Shri Digamber Jain Mandir

Satyanarayan Agarwal S/O Prabhudayal Vs Shambhu Dayal S/O Gopal Lal