M/S Communico And Marketing Co. Repdt. By Sri Sekhar Saha vs. The State Of Tripura And Ors

Held

The Court refused to entertain the challenge, finding no arbitrariness, unreasonableness, or action contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The Court noted that the petitioner's arguments regarding the cancellation of the NIT dated 22.01.2020 and their inability to participate in the NIT dated 06.03.2020 were far-fetched and hardly acceptable. The Court also questioned why the petitioner did not approach the court immediately after the impugned NIT dated 06.03.2020 was floated. The Court did not find merit in the petitioner's claims of vested rights being adversely affected or the tendering process being vitiated. The ratio decidendi is that the High Court will not interfere in tendering processes unless there is clear arbitrariness, unreasonableness, or a violation of constitutional provisions, and the petitioner must approach the court promptly. The writ petition was dismissed.

Facts

The petitioner, a participant in a tendering process for an Annual Maintenance Contract (AMC) for printing machines, challenged a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) dated 06.03.2020. The petitioner argued that previous NITs were arbitrarily recalled, affecting their vested rights. They also sought a direction to issue a fresh tender. The petitioner claimed they could not participate in the NIT dated 06.03.2020 due to the pandemic and emergency situation. They admitted that the tendering process had advanced to the final phase. The petitioner's grievance was that the entire tendering process was vitiated as they could not participate in the latest NIT. They also stated that in a prior tendering process, GST was unilaterally added to their quoted amount, leading to a request for negotiation, after which that NIT was cancelled. A subsequent NIT dated 22.01.2020 was also cancelled after technical bids were opened, where the petitioner was technically successful. The petitioner alleged arbitrary action leading to their detriment.

Key Issues

1. Whether the cancellation of the NIT dated 22.01.2020 was arbitrary and done to deprive the petitioner of the AMC order, thereby violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the petitioner's inability to participate in the NIT dated 06.03.2020 due to the pandemic and emergency situation warrants interference by the Court? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the cancellation of the NIT dated 22.01.2020 was arbitrary and aimed at preventing them from securing the AMC. They also argued that their failure to participate in the NIT dated 06.03.2020 was due to the prevailing pandemic and emergency conditions. The petitioner further argued that in a previous tender, GST was unilaterally added to their quoted amount, which was not mentioned in the original NIT, and their acceptance was conditional on negotiation, after which the NIT was cancelled. Revenue's arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments from the respondents (Revenue/State).