Karnataka High Court
Grasim Industries Limited vs State Of Karnataka on 27 February, 2018
Equivalent citations: 2018 (3) AKR 380
Author: Vineet Kothari
Bench: Vineet Kothari
1/8
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
WRIT PETITION NO.5669/2018(GM-Ten)
BETWEEN :
Grasim Industries Limited,
A Company registered under the
Companies Act, 1956 having its
Office at Aditya Birla Centre,
'A' Wing, 2nd Floor,
S.K.Ahire Marg, Worli,
Mumbai - 400 030.
Represented by its
Authorized Signatory
Mr.Amitabh Verma. ...PETITIONER
(By Sri.Ganapati Hegde , Adv. for
M/s.Dua Assts., Advs.)
AND :
1. State of Karnataka,
Energy Department,
Vikasa Soudha,
Bebngaluru - 560 001.
Represented by the
Additional Chief Secretary.
2. Karnataka Renewable Energy
Development Limited (KREDL),
#39, "Shanthigruha",
Bharath Scouts & Guides
Building, Palace Road,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
Date of Order: 27-02-2018 W.P. No.5669/2018
Grasim Industries Limited Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors.
2/8
3. The Project Director,
e-Procurement Cell,
M.S.Building,
Bengaluru - 560 001. ...RESPONDENTS
(By Sri.Vijaykumar A.Patil, AGA for R1,
Sri.G.S.Kannur, Adv. for R2 & R3)
. . . .
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India praying to declare that the bid
with reference Bid No.B2543457 submitted by the
petitioner vide Annexure 'E' is valid and in accordance with
the RFP and that the decision of the Tender Accepting
Committee of the respondent No.2 in rejecting the Bid
No.B2543457 of the petitioner is nonest, null and void and
etc.
This writ petition coming on for orders, this day, the
Court made the following:
ORDER
Sri.Ganapati Hegde, Adv. for M/s.Dua Associates for the Petitioner Sri.Vijaykumar A.Patil, AGA for Respondent No.1 Sri.G.S.Kannur, Adv. for Respondents No.2 and 3 The petitioner - Company M/s. Grasim Industries Limited has filed this writ petition in this Court on 05.02.2018 with the following prayers:
Date of Order: 27-02-2018 W.P. No.5669/2018 Grasim Industries Limited Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors.3/8
(i) Declare that the bid with reference Bid No.B2543457 submitted by the Petitioner [Annexure-E] is valid and in accordance with the RFP and that the decision of the Tender Accepting Committee of the Respondent No.2 in rejecting the Bid No.B2543457 of the Petitioner is non-est, null and void;
(ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction to the Respondent No.2 and the Respondent No.3 to permit the Petitioner to deposit Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh Only) towards part of Bid Security payable through the E-Procurement website for the first project through the e-payment options under the RFP;
(iii) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Director to the Respondent No.2 to consider the Bid No.B2543457 submitted by the Petitioner [Annexure-E] in accordance with the tender documents and open the financial bid of the Petitioner;
Date of Order: 27-02-2018 W.P. No.5669/2018 Grasim Industries Limited Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors. 4/8
(iv) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction to the Respondent No.2 to award the tender the Petitioner is found the lowest with respect to the Petitioner's Bid No.B2543457;
(v) Award costs of the petitioner; and
(vi) Grant such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. While issuing notice to the respondents, a cognate Bench of this Court passed the following order on 08.02.2018:
"Learned Government Advocate to accept notice for respondent No.1.
Copy be served.
Issue notice to respondents No.2 and 3. Since, the contention as urged in the instant petition relates to the initial deposit of Rs.10 Lakhs which according to the petitioner, though had been paid by them had not been uploaded in the E-portal due to technical glitch and in that light, the letter dated 22.01.2018 addressed by the Bank is relied on at Date of Order: 27-02-2018 W.P. No.5669/2018 Grasim Industries Limited Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors.5/8
Annexure-M and further since it is contended by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner with reference to the averment in the petition that all other conditions had been complied by the petitioner, the matter would require consideration in that regard.
Hence, until the respondents appear herein, if any further progress is made, it would defeat the right of the petitioner. In that view, the respondents No.2 and 3 are directed not to proceed further from the stage at which the tender process has reached as on today."
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner urged before the Court that due to some technical glitches and failure on the part of the Project Director, e-Procurement Cell, the earnest money or the initial deposit of Rs.10,00,000/- to be made by the Tenderor of the said money in favour of respondent No.2 - KREDL, the Nodal Agency for development of Solar Power projects in Karnataka in 43 Taluks/Constituencies, could not be credited in the account of the said KREDL on the stipulated date on 16.01.2018, but despite filing of the present writ petition in this Court on 05.02.2018 and passing of the aforesaid Date of Order: 27-02-2018 W.P. No.5669/2018 Grasim Industries Limited Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors. 6/8 interim order on 08.02.2018 directing the respondents to maintain the status as it existed on 08.02.2018, the respondent No.2 - KREDL has proceeded further to award the Contract in question in favour of third parties ignoring the tender of the petitioner - Company on 08.02.2018 itself.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents however submitted before the Court that in view of the earnest money or the deposit of Rs.10,00,000/- as required as per the Tender condition had not reached the account of respondent No.2 - KREDL on cut-off date 16.01.2018 the stipulated date, therefore the respondent No.2 was entitled to go ahead with the contractual process or tender process, ignoring the Tender of the applicant Company - Grasim Industries Limited and there is no illegality in their action and since the said Contract has now been awarded in favour of the third party on 08.02.2018, the present writ petition has become infructuous.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is satisfied that in view of the admitted fact on Date of Order: 27-02-2018 W.P. No.5669/2018 Grasim Industries Limited Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors. 7/8 the part of the petitioner - Company that the deposit of Rs.10,00,000/- in question for one reason or the other could not reach the account of respondent No.3 - The Project Director, e-Procurement Cell on the stipulated date on 16.01.2018, the respondents cannot be held responsible for any error in going ahead with the tender process ignoring the application of the petitioner - Company on the given date. The reasons for such amount not reaching the account of the Respondent No.3 is not relevant at all.
In view of the admitted fact that the initial deposit did not reach their account, the respondent No.2 was entitled to go ahead with the contractual process in question.
Even if the interim order passed by the cognate Bench was passed on the same date 08.02.2018, there is nothing on record to establish that the Respondent went ahead with the Tender process in violation even of the interim order passed by this Court. The timing of the passing of the said interim order by this Court and the timing under which the Tender process was undertaken by Date of Order: 27-02-2018 W.P. No.5669/2018 Grasim Industries Limited Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors. 8/8 the respondent No.2 and contract was awarded to third party on 08.02.2018 is not on record.
Thus no deliberate attempt on the part of the respondent No.2 to breach the orders passed by this Court can be inferred from the said process.
6. In view of this, the writ petition is rendered infructuous and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, petition is dismissed. No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE ` SPS