Chhattisgarh Healthcare Private Limited vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was ineligible for the tender because production commenced in the financial year 2019-20, making it impossible to submit production details for the financial years 2017-18 and 2018-19, as required by Clause 5.1 of the tender document. Consequently, the Court found it unnecessary to adjudicate on the issue of GST return submission. The Court dismissed the petitioner's prayer to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach the authorities, stating that when a petitioner is not qualified under Cover-A, there is no question of permitting them to file a representation to explain the non-submission of production details. The writ petition was dismissed as having no merit. The ratio decidendi is that a bidder must meet the pre-qualification criteria as laid out in the tender document, and failure to do so renders their bid invalid, irrespective of other submissions.

Facts

Chhattisgarh Healthcare Private Limited, a pharmaceutical company, responded to a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) issued by Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Limited for a rate contract of consumables for 2021-22. The tender process involved Cover-A (Earnest Money Deposit, Tender Fee, Pre-Qualification), Cover-B (technical bid), and Cover-C (price bid). The petitioner was declared ineligible in the Summary Sheet of Cover-A on October 6, 2021, due to two stated shortcomings: (i) GST return submitted was for March 2020, not within the last three months from the tender date, and (ii) production details for financial years 2017-18 and 2018-19 were not submitted. The petitioner argued that production commenced in 2019-20, making the earlier production details unavailable, and that GST returns were filed as per the NIT. The petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach authorities to explain the circumstances.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner was ineligible for the tender due to not submitting GST returns for the period specified in the tender document, specifically within at least one month of the last three months from the tender date, as required by Clause 5.1 of the tender document. 2. Whether the petitioner was ineligible for the tender due to not submitting production details for financial years 2017-18 and 2018-19, as required by Clause 5.1 of the tender document. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that production commenced in 2019-20, thus production details for 2017-18 and 2018-19 could not be submitted. They also argued that GST returns were filed as per the NIT and were re-submitted upon objection. The petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to explain the circumstances to the authorities. Respondents' arguments: Respondent No.2 argued that the petitioner was not qualified to bid as per the tender terms, as no new documents would be entertained, and the prayer for filing a representation was mis-conceived. They asserted that the writ application had no merit.