Ajay Yadav vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Ajay Yadav, proprietor of M/s Ajay Yadav, applied for a work contract for healthcare kitchen and dietary services at Government Medical College, Azamgarh. The bid closing date was 26.7.2023, with the final decision on 26.8.2023. The petitioner's GST registration certificate was found to be 'Cancelled' when his documents were opened on 26.7.2023. The petitioner claims to have rectified this issue and updated the GST status on the GEM portal on 12.8.2023. However, the respondent rejected his bid on 25.8.2023, citing the cancelled GST registration on the bid closing date. The petitioner sought to quash this order and a consequential order dated 28.8.2023.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner's GST registration certificate was cancelled on the last date for submission of tender documents, i.e., 26.7.2023. The Court relied on the Full Bench decision in Gaurav Sharma vs. State Of U.P. And Ors., which established that only documents valid on or before the last date of submission are to be considered, and no rectification or subsequent submission of documents is permissible after the cut-off date. The Court found no irregularity or infirmity in the impugned order rejecting the petitioner's bid on the ground of having a cancelled GST registration on the submission date. Therefore, the petitioner's claim for rectification and consideration of the subsequent valid GST certificate was rejected. The Court concluded that the writ petition lacked merit.
Key Issues
1. Whether the candidature of the petitioner is liable to be rejected on the ground that his GST registration certificate was cancelled on the last date for submission of tender documents, despite subsequent rectification? The petitioner argued that he rectified the infirmity in his GST registration after being notified by the respondent and updated the status on the GEM portal. He contended that this subsequent rectification should be considered, and the rejection of his bid was erroneous. The respondent argued that as per the Full Bench decision in Gaurav Sharma vs. State Of U.P. And Ors., only documents submitted on or before the last date of submission would be considered. They contended that the petitioner's GST certificate was invalid on the cut-off date of 26.7.2023, and no rectification or subsequent submission should be allowed after this date.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 129, Rule 86A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:225901-DB Court No. - 40 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 32746 of 2023 Petitioner :- Ajay Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mukesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent.
The present writ petition has been preferred for quashing the order impugned dated 25.8.2023 and consequential order dated 28.8.2023 passed by the respondent.
The petitioner claims to be proprietor of M/s Ajay Yadav, which is engaged in business activities being service provider of work contracts. The respondent no. 3 issued an online advertisement dated 7.7.2023 inviting bid from the prospective firms and service providers who are desirous and interested to work in the Government Medical College, Azamgarh for health care kitchen and dietary service. The petitioner being eligible proceeded to apply online as per the instruction and direction contained in the brochure on 7.7.2023, which is brought on record as Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition. The respondent no. 4 vide letter dated 10.8.2023 informed the petitioner that some infirmity was detected in the GST registration paper provided by the petitioner and accordingly clarification was sought from the petitioner for further action. Copy of the said letter is also brought on record as Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition. Pursuant to the said letter, the petitioner verified the status of his GST registration from Chartered Accountant and after getting the infirmity removed, he made available GST status on the GEM portal on 12.8.2023. Thereafter, the respondent proceeded to conclude bid proceeding on 26.8.2023 and rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that on the date the bid was closed, the GST registration paper provided by the petitioner was cancelled, therefore, he was disqualified. In this backdrop, we have asked learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel to seek instructions in the matter vide order dated 19.10.2023. 4. In response thereof, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has placed the instructions dated 6.11.2023 sent by Principal, Government Medical College, Azamgarh, which is taken on record. He submits that the entire proceeding had to be finalised within 90 days and the last date for submission of relevant documents was 26.7.2023. The applications received by the respondent were opened on 26.7.2023 and it was found that 21 firms have participated. While evaluating the documents of the petitioner, GST Certificate of the petitioner was showing the status as "Cancelled". It is not in dispute that prior to cut-off date i.e. 26.7.2023, the petitioner's GST certificate was not valid. Even though it is claimed that he has "Cancelled". Even on the last date of submission of tender form, petitioner did not have GST certificate in his hand, whereas, he had submitted all his documents including the GST certificate, which was not valid. Even though inadvertently, the department had made some correspondence to the petitioner wherein it was indicated that the petitioner's GST certificate was not valid. Taking shelter of the said communication, petitioner obtained the GST certifiate and claimed that shortcoming, if any, at the time of submission of tender form, the same stood rectified in view of the subsequent communication. The said claim is also resisted by learned ACSC in the backdrop of Full Bench in Gaurav Sharma (supra), wherein, after the last date of submission of form, no leave can be accorded to the prospective bidders even to rectify any discrepancy or shortcoming while submitting the form in question in case the same is not provided to every prospective bidders. The Full Bench had considered the following issues in Gaurav Sharma (supra). "A. Whether the candidature of an OBC candidate is liable to be rejected on the ground of the caste certificate having been submitted after the last date for submission of applications? B. Whether the decision in Arvind Kumar Yadav lays down and represents the correct position in law ? C. Whether there exists any irreconcilable difference or repugnancy between the norms fixed by the Union and State Governments with regard to certification of creamy layer? If not, its effect."
The relevant question No. A was answered in the negative. Therefore, merely on the basis of solitary communication to the petitioner, it cannot be pressed that the discrepancy was rectified on account of submission of subsequent certificate in view of Full Bench dictum of this Court in Gaurav Sharma (supra).
In view of the aforesaid discussion, we do not find any irregularity or infirmity in the order impugned which may warrant interference of this Court.
The writ petition sans merit and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 30.11.2023 A.K.Srivastava ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.