Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
M/S. Devendra Construction Co vs State Of Rajasthan on 17 January, 2022
Author: Inderjeet Singh
Bench: Inderjeet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14015/2021
M/s. Devendra Construction Co.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kamlakar Sharma, Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Siddharth Bapna, through V.C. For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Singhvi, AG assisted by Mr. Sheetanshu Sharma, through V.C. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH Order 17/01/2022 Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this writ petition has been considered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur in the matter of M/s. Devendra Construction Company Vs. The State of Rajasthan (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16266/2021) where-in on 11.01.2022 following order was passed;
"1. Mr. Maheshwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that in identical matter being SB Civil Writ Petition No.6959/2021 : Shaitan Singh Sankhla Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., the following interim order has been passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.07.2021 :
"In view of the above, the respondent No.2 - Water Resources Department is restrained from insisting the petitioner to pay additional performance security till next date."
2. Mr. Pankaj Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, on the other hand, submits that the respondents have filed a reply to the writ petition and according (Downloaded on 19/01/2022 at 09:39:23 PM) (2 of 4) [CW-14015/2021] to their stand, the State has required the petitioner to furnish Additional Performance Security as per Clause No.37 of Instructions to Bid (ITB) of the bid document. He clarified that since the amount of petitioner's bid was less than 85% of the estimated cost (as per the calculation given), the respondent - State was justified in its action impugned.
3. In the prima-facie opinion of this Court, the Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Rules, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 'RTPP Rules') do not speak of any additional performance security and any condition dehors the provisions of RTPP Rules cannot be enforced.
4. That apart, the order dated 26.11.2019 issued by the Finance Department is very clear, very categorical in which, the PWD and PHED have been asked not to take additional performance security. On the basis of such circular, the Coordinate Bench has granted interim order.
5. Matter requires consideration.
6. Issue notice.
7. Mr. Pankaj Sharma, learned AAG, accepts notices on behalf of the respondents.
8. List the matter after four weeks.
9. Meanwhile, the respondents shall not insist the petitioner to pay additional performance security.
10. Connect with SB Civil Writ Petition No.6959/2021".
Learned senior counsel further submits that similar order has also been passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at principal Seat Jodhpur in the matter of Shaintan Singh Sankhla Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6959/2021) on 29.07.2021 which reads as under:-
"Despite service of notices no one appeared on behalf of the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that despite clear directions of the Finance Department not to levy additional performance security, the (Downloaded on 19/01/2022 at 09:39:23 PM) (3 of 4) [CW-14015/2021] respondents are insisting the petitioner to pay the same.In view of the above, the respondent No. 2
- Water resource Department is restrained from insisting the petitioner to pay additional performance security till next date.
List after two weeks."
Learned senior counsel further submits that since the controversy involved in this writ petition is similar in nature to that of writ petitions filed at principal Seat, Jodhpur, therefore, prayed for interim relief.
Learned Advocate General opposed the prayer made by petitioner's counsel.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that in similar matters interim orders have been passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in favour of the petitioners, therefore, prima facie, on the ground of parity, I deem it just and proper to pass interim order in this matter also.
In that view of the matter, the order passed by the respondent(s) dated 07.12.2021 so far as debarring the petitioner from participating in the re-invitation of the bids as well as requiring the petitioner to deposit the sum of Rs. 2.302 crore (2% of the estimated cost of the work in the NIT) shall remain stayed.
Learned Advocate General submits that the matter is of urgent nature and public interest is also involved and prayed for early disposal of the writ petition.
The prayer made by the learned Advocate General seems to be reasonable.
List this writ petition for admission on 31.01.2022.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J (Downloaded on 19/01/2022 at 09:39:23 PM) (4 of 4) [CW-14015/2021] CHETNA BEHRANI /172 (Downloaded on 19/01/2022 at 09:39:23 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)