Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Skanray Technologies Pvt. Ltd vs State Of Gujarat & 2 on 26 September, 2017

Bench: M.R. Shah, B.N. Karia

                  C/SCA/4558/2016                                             JUDGMENT




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT
                             AHMEDABAD

               SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4558 of 2016

         FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
         HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
         and
         HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA
         =============================================================

         1    Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to
              see the judgment ?

         2    To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

         3    Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the
              judgment ?

         4    Whether this case involves a substantial question of law
              as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or
              any order made thereunder ?

         =============================================================
             SKANRAY TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD....Petitioner(s)
                              Versus
                STATE OF GUJARAT & 2....Respondent(s)
         =============================================================
         Appearance :
         Mr BB NAIK, Sr Advocate with Mr VIRAL M PANDYA, Advocate for
         Petitioner
         Mr DHAWAN JAYSWAL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 :State
         Mr UMESH A TRIVEDI, Advocate for the Respondent(s) No. 3
         Mr KAML B TRIVEDI, Sr Advocate with Mr UTKARSH R SHARMA,
         Advocate for the Respondent(s) No. 2
         NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         =============================================================

                         CORAM:     HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
                                    and
                                    HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA


                                           Page 1 of 6

HC-NIC                                  Page 1 of 6      Created On Fri Oct 06 23:05:35 IST 2017
                  C/SCA/4558/2016                                               JUDGMENT



                                   26th September 2017

         ORAL JUDGMENT                 (PER : HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M.R.

SHAH)

1. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief :

"7 [A] Your Lordship may be pleased to hold and declare that the action of the respondent no. 2-GMSCL in decision making process of confirming the subject matter tender in favour of M/s. Allengers Medical Systems Limited-respondent no. 3 as unfair, arbitrary and unreasonable and further be pleased to direct the respondent no. 2 to disqualify the said bidder ie., the respondent no. 3-Allengers who had committed glaring irregularities and illegalities, while submitting tender form and further be pleased to restrain the respondent no. 3 in participating subject matter tender process for the present tender and further be pleased to direct the respondent no. 2-GMSCL to continue with the tender process amongst the other bidders who have participated in the subject matter tender."
Page 2 of 6

HC-NIC Page 2 of 6 Created On Fri Oct 06 23:05:35 IST 2017 C/SCA/4558/2016 JUDGMENT

2. Shri BB Naik, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner does not press the draft amendment and has restricted the present petition to prayer in terms of Para 7 [A] of the petition; reproduced hereinabove.

3. It is reported and it is not in dispute that during pendency of the present petition and after some orders were passed by this Court, the work-order in favour of the respondent no. 3 has been cancelled and the appropriate order of debarment has been passed against the respondent no. 3. It is also reported that even for the alleged act of forgery and/or for appropriate offence, even an FIR has been lodged. In view of the above, as such there shall be no cause for the petitioner to continue with the present petition.

4. Shri Kamal B Trivedi, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent-Corporation has stated at the bar that so as to see that such eventuality which has happened in the present may not occur again, now the Corporation has evolved/come out with Page 3 of 6 HC-NIC Page 3 of 6 Created On Fri Oct 06 23:05:35 IST 2017 C/SCA/4558/2016 JUDGMENT debarment policy which shall ensure that in future cases of violation of essential terms and conditions, and in cases of illegality committed by the bidders, the same shall be dealt with in strict manner and such bidders are not allowed to participate in the future tender processes of the respondent-Corporation. The aforesaid is disclosed in paragraph 6 of the Additional Affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no. 2 dated 11th September 2017, which has been affirmed by Dr. Rajshekhar Marutichandra Mehta, General Manager [LP & QC] of the Corporation.

5. Today, when the present petition is taken up for further hearing, Shri Trivedi, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent-Corporation has tendered one Additional Affidavit on behalf of the respondent no. 2-Corporation dated 23rd September 2017 duly affirmed by one Dr. Vipul Aggarwal holding the post of Managing Director of the respondent- Corporation in which the respondent-Corporation has now come out with a new "Standard Operating Policy" Page 4 of 6

HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Fri Oct 06 23:05:35 IST 2017 C/SCA/4558/2016 JUDGMENT for tender process by the respondent-Corporation. Shri Kamal Trivedi, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent-Corporation has stated at the bar that in future purchases by the respondent- Corporation for all the items; may it be medicines/medical equipments, the same shall be adhered to and made applicable. It is stated that the new "Standard Operating Policy" is self-contended which shall take care of every eventuality. He has stated at the bar that over and above the procedure to be followed, as per the above "Standard Operating Policy" irrespective of any complaint received, the Corporation shall ensure and hold inquiry/preliminary inquiry at the technical bid stage itself and/or thereafter; if required, whether any bidder has satisfied and/or complied with essential conditions or not, and/or whether the documents produced by the concerned bidder in support of their claim, compliance of essential conditions shall be verified.

6. The concerned respondent-Corporation is directed Page 5 of 6 HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Fri Oct 06 23:05:35 IST 2017 C/SCA/4558/2016 JUDGMENT to act as above; more particularly, as assured and stated in their Additional Affidavits dated 11th September 2017 and 23rd September 2017 and as per the "Standard Operating Policy" produced alongwith Additional Affidavit dated 23rd September 2017 and as stated hereinabove.

With this, the present Special Civil Application stands disposed of.

[M.R Shah, J.] [B.N Karia, J.] Prakash Page 6 of 6 HC-NIC Page 6 of 6 Created On Fri Oct 06 23:05:35 IST 2017