Anil Kumar vs. Delhi Jal Board

Held

The Court held that the Corrigendum dated 23.02.2022 issued by the Delhi Jal Board substantially redressed the grievances raised by the petitioner regarding Clause 3.4 of the tender. Regarding the issue raised concerning Clause 3.5(A) on the eligibility criterion for septage cleaning machine manufacturers, the Court noted the respondent's submission, based on instructions, that the clarification from the erstwhile tender was in the context of the requirement stipulated in Clause 3.5(B) of that tender. The respondent further stated that 208 bidders had successfully submitted bids in compliance with the erstwhile Clause 3.5(B). The Court found that the respondent's clarification, along with the extension of the tender submission date to March 15, 2022, was sufficient for the petitioner to make an intelligent bid. Therefore, no further clarification was deemed necessary. The petition was disposed of on these terms.

Facts

The petitioner, Anil Kumar, filed a writ petition challenging a tender issued by the Delhi Jal Board (DJB). The petitioner's grievances primarily concerned Clause 3.4 of the tender, which stipulated that the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) should have manufactured and supplied a minimum of 100 LCV Truck mounted equipment for waste management in the last five financial years, requiring copies of Purchase Orders and GST returns. Following the Court's order on February 14, 2022, the DJB issued a Corrigendum on February 23, 2022. This Corrigendum deleted the amendment made to Clause 3.4 by a previous Corrigendum dated February 1, 2022, and also provided a list of trainers with valid certifications. The Corrigendum substantially addressed the petitioner's initial concerns.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Corrigendum dated 23.02.2022 issued by the Delhi Jal Board substantially redresses the grievances raised by the petitioner in the writ petition concerning Clause 3.4 of the tender. 2. Whether the clarification provided by the respondent regarding the eligibility criterion for septage cleaning machine manufacturers in Clause 3.5(A) is sufficient for the petitioner to make an intelligent bid. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner, through Mr. Mahajan, argued that while the Corrigendum addressed the primary issue with Clause 3.4, a new concern arose regarding Clause 3.5(A) concerning the eligibility criterion for septage cleaning machine manufacturers. This clause requires OEMs to have procured over 100 sliding vane type pumps and possess competency for fitment and after-sales service. The petitioner sought confirmation whether a clarification from a previous tender, stating that the 100 pumps could be of different capacities and types, would apply to the current tender, as an identical condition was present.