M/S.Budharaja Mining And Construction LTD vs. Ntpc Limited
Held
The Court noted that the dispute regarding the interpretation of Clause 20 of the Special Conditions of Contract, specifically concerning the quoting of GST, was central. The petitioner argued that their bid of Rs. 50,18,58,129.43 (excluding GST) was lower than opposite party No.4's bid. However, the opposite parties contended that opposite party No.4's bid of Rs. 53.39 crores was inclusive of GST as the GST field was left blank, as per Clause 20. The Court observed that the price bid of opposite party No.4 was Rs. 53.39 crores, which was significantly higher than the petitioner's bid of Rs. 50,18,58,129.43. Given this factual discrepancy in the amounts and the subsequent higher bid by opposite party No.4, the Court found that the prayer made in the writ petition had become academic. The Court concluded that there was no merit in the writ petition, and it was liable to be dismissed. The interim order dated 02.06.2020 was vacated.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Budharaja Mining and Construction Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging the selection of M/s. Sri Durga Condev Pvt. Ltd. (opposite party No.4) as the successful bidder by NTPC Ltd. (opposite parties Nos.1 to 3) for a construction project. The tender was for an estimated work worth Rs. 58,01,82,808.60. The petitioner's Techno Commercial Bid was rejected. The petitioner claimed its price bid of Rs. 50,18,58,129.43 (excluding GST @ 18%) was lower than the estimated cost and also lower than opposite party No.4's price. An interim order was passed on 02.06.2020, preventing the issuance of a work order to opposite party No.4. Counter and rejoinder affidavits were filed. NTPC's affidavit stated that opposite party No.4's price bid was Rs. 53.38 crores, considered as L1 including GST, as opposite party No.4 left the GST field blank, and Clause 20 of the Special Conditions of Contract stipulated that GST would be treated as included if the field was left blank or indicated as zero.
Key Issues
1. Whether the selection of opposite party No.4 as the successful bidder was arbitrary and mala fide, particularly concerning the opening of the price bid on the same day as the rejection of the petitioner's Techno Commercial Bid? 2. Whether the interpretation and application of Clause 20 of the Special Conditions of Contract regarding the quoting of GST by opposite party No.4 was correct? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the selection of opposite party No.4 was arbitrary and demonstrated mala fide intent, evidenced by the simultaneous opening of the price bid on the day of their Techno Commercial Bid's rejection. They contended that their price bid of Rs. 50,18,58,129.43 (excluding GST) was lower than opposite party No.4's bid. They also argued that opposite party No.4 quoted Rs. 53.39 crores by leaving the GST field blank, which was contrary to the tender conditions and procedures outlined in Clauses 21, 22, and 23, and that the opening of the bid was not notified. Revenue/State's Arguments: The opposite parties (NTPC and Sri Durga Condev Pvt. Ltd.) argued that opposite party No.4's bid of Rs. 53.38 crores was considered L1 including GST because opposite party No.4 left the GST field blank. They relied on Clause 20 of the Special Conditions of Contract, which stated that if the GST field was left blank or indicated as zero, GST would be treated as included in the price.
Sections Cited
Clause 20, Clause 21, Clause 22, Clause 23
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER
The Court is convened through Video Conferencing mode.
Heard Mr. Y. Dash, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. B.S. Tripathy, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.1 to 3 and Mr. G.M. Rath, learned counsel for the opposite party No.4. 3. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-M/s. Budharaja Mining and Construction Ltd. challenging the action of the opposite parties Nos.1 to 3 in selecting opposite party No.4-Sri Durga Condev Pvt. Ltd. as successful bidder, pursuant to the Notice Inviting Tender dated 30.09.2019 (Annexure-1) issued by the opposite party- NTPC Ltd. for "Construction of starter ash dyke at Masunihata, for State # I Ash Dyke of NTPC Ltd. Talcher-Kaniha (2 x 500 MW) (Domestic Competitive Bidding).
The facts of the case are that
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.