Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
M/S Ind Swift Ltd vs State (Medical And Health Dep)Anr on 21 February, 2012
Author: Ajay Rastogi
Bench: Ajay Rastogi
In The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench, Jaipur O R D E R S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2254/2012 M/s. Ind-Swift Ltd. Vs. State of Raj. & Anr. Date Of Order :: 21.02.2012 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Nitin Jain, for petitioner.
Instant petition has been filed assailing order of the authority dt.21.10.2011 (Annx.13) blacklisting the petitioner company from participating in all the tender process of Rajasthan Medical Services Corporation Ltd (RMSCL) till 31.03.2012.
It has come on record that the petitioner company was incorporated on 06.06.1986 and certificate for commencement of business was granted by Registrar of Companies on 15.12.1986. However, it is admitted by the petitioner company that it was blacklisted by Employees State Insurance Corporation, New Delhi (ESIC), vide order dt.11.08.2008 for a period of three years and the writ petition filed by the petitioner company before the High Court of Delhi against the order passed by ESIC dt.11.08.2008 as informed to this Court has been finally dismissed somewhere in March,2011. However, the petitioner company had participated in the tender process of RMSCL dt.02.06.2011 and the bids were opened on 05.07.2011 and after opening of the bids a complaint was received against the petitioner company informing authorities that the petitioner company stood black listed by ESIC, New Delhi and admittedly on the date of submission of tender and opening of technical bid the Delhi High Court finally dismissed the writ petition preferred by the petitioner against the order of the ESIC dt.11.08.2008 black listing the petitioner company for a period of three years and the bidder was required to submit an undertaking in the format appended to the tender document Annx.XI disclosing that the company has not been black listed/banned by any State/Central Government and indisputably the petitioner company during the interregnum period was blacklisted by ESIC on 11.08.2008 and it concealed this material fact in its affidavit which was to be disclosed in the format appended to the bid document and after the application was made the matter was investigated and it was revealed that that the petitioner company concealed the material information while participating in the tender process initiated by the respondent and a notice came to be served on 09.09.2011 and after the reply filed by the petitioner company was taken into consideration the authority passed order dt.21.10.2011 (Annx.13) debarring the petitioner company from participating in all tenders of RMSCL till 31.03.2012.
The present tender which has been floated by the respondent Annx.16 last date initially fixed was 16.02.2012 but by further corrigendum it has been extended upto 23.02.2012 and the petitioner company being debarred by the authority vide order dt.21.10.2011 remain in force till 31.03.2012 and during the interregnum period the tender has come in process and admittedly the petitioner company not being allowed to participate in the bidding process has approached to this Court by filing instant petition.
Shri Nitin Jain, counsel appearing for petitioner, submits that the show cause notice dt.09.09.2011 served upon the petitioner company it was called upon to give its explanation regarding the alleged concealment being made while disclosing in Annx.XI pertaining to the bid document at the stage when it participated in June/July,2011 but no notice was served to debar the petitioner company for a particular period and in such circumstances the decision taken by the authorities debarring the petitioner company till 31.03.2012 is in violation of principles of natural justice and that requires interference by this Court.
Counsel submits that the petitioner is a registered company working since June,1986 and for a period of three years it was blacklisted and after expiry of the period in some of the states in the government owned organizations being L-1 has been awarded contracts and in such circumstances the decision taken by the authority debarring the petitioner till 31.03.2012 and not permitting to participate in the tender process in question is arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.
The submissions made are wholly without substance for the reason that this fact once remain admitted that in the earlier bidding process when the petitioner company participated in June/July,2011 initiated at the behest of the respondent, the petitioner company admittedly did not disclose in the format appended to Annx.XI of the bid document that the petitioner company was blacklisted during the interregnum period and that being so the petitioner was served with a show cause notice dt.09.09.2011 and after taking its reply into consideration, decision was taken by the authority debarring the petitioner from participating in all tenders of RMSCL till 31.03.2012 and during the interregnum period the petitioner cannot be permitted to participate in the tender of RMSCL.
As regards the submission made regarding the notice debarring the petitioner company was not served, is of no substance for the reason that the copy of the notice has not been placed and there was no objection raised to this effect and that apart it was only for the purpose of taking the fact situation into consideration and to take decision as to whether the petitioner company is to be debarred or not and that being so if the authority has taken decision on the admitted facts which came on record while the tenders being floated by RMSCL, this Court does not find any error in the decision making process and when the petitioner company has concealed material fact such decision can always be taken by the authority to safeguard their interest and this Court does not find any manifest apparent error in the decision making process of the respondent which may require interference.
Consequently, the petition being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed.
(Ajay Rastogi),J.
VS Shekhawat/-p.5 2254cw12Feb21FnlDsps.doc Certificate - All corrections have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed/Vijay Singh Shekhawat/PAJ