Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Technical Bid Evaluation Summary (Annexure P-4) of the petitioner company prepared by respondent No.2, is erroneous. Petitioner submitted all relevant documents in support of work experience of two similar nature of works executed by M/s S.S. Cargo Movers Private Limited, Bhilai, District Durg (CG), a partnership firm, and M/s Godawari Deify SSCM JV, a joint venture firm, in which two Directors of petitioner company namely, Shri Shailesh Kumar Jaiswal and Shri Sukhdev Singh Sidhu were partners and having 60% share and therefore, 60% of work experience in M/s S.S. Cargo Movers and M/s Godawari Deify SSCM JV, was to be taken into consideration, which was in accordance with sub- clause (viii) under heading 'Technical Evaluation by System' under Clause-6 of the NIT. First similar nature of work was issued by the Project Officer, Lingaraj OCP MCL in favour of M/s S.S. Cargo Movers for the period 01.10.2020 to 30.9.2021 for Rs.19,47,52,327.43. Second work of similar nature was issued by the Project Officer, Lingaraj OCP MCL in favour of Godavari Deify SSCM JV for the period 16.10.2020 to 30.9.2021 of the work value of Rs.28,99,93,164.16. As per requirement of NIT, a bidder is required to have work experience of 50% of the tender value. The work experience submitted by petitioner company is more than the criteria fixed. He contended that as per technical bid evaluation summary dated 28.3.2022, technical bid of the petitioner company was rejected on extraneous considerations. Respondent No.2 had rejected technical bid of petitioner company considering that experience of partners of petitioner company is the experience of a partnership firm and not of a limited company. Said consideration of work experience submitted by the petitioner in technical bid evaluation summary is contrary to the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of New Horizons Limited & another Vs. Union of India & ors, reported in (1995) 1 SCC 478.

He contended that in sub-clause (viii) of Clause-6 of NIT there is specific mention that value of experience is to be assessed in proportion to the actual share of bidder in any joint venture / partnership firm against eligibility. Respondent No.2 while preparing technical bid evaluation summary (Annexure P-4) had not considered the work experience of two Directors of petitioner company as partners in a joint venture / partnership firm to the extent of 60% and thereby erred in evaluating work experience criteria of petitioner company. Respondent No.2 further erred in not calculating value of 60% towards work experience by Godawari Deify SSCM JV, a joint venture firm, in which S.S. Cargo Movers is the lead firm. Two Directors of the petitioner company were having 60% share in S.S. Cargo Movers, partnership firm.

e. Experience submitted for getting benefit in consideration of Eligibility Criteria in the name and style of Firm :- 50% Participation share of Godawari Deify SSCM JV and then 60 Percent participation share of two partners namely Shri Shailesh Jaiswal and Shri Sukdev Singh Sidhu (as Directors of S Square Cargo Movers Private Limited)."

9. Value of work experience assessed by the Tender Committee, as per document uploaded in official website, as Rs.8,69,97,949.25/-, whereas the petitioner claimed valuation at Rs.14,49,96,528.08/-. Estimated value of subject NIT is mentioned as Rs.22,22,45,023.42/- (inclusive of GST). The Tender Committee did not consider work experience of two Directors of petitioner company with M/s SS Cargo Movers as its partners on the ground that M/s SS Cargo Movers, a partnership firm, was not taken-over by the petitioner company. There is yet another reason assigned by respondent for not considering experience of M/s SS Cargo Movers in the account of petitioner company that it is not in the name of bidder company M/s S. Square Cargo Movers, rather it is in the name of 'M/s S.S. Cargo Movers' which is a different firm.

11. Case of the petitioner is that two Directors of petitioner company by name Shri Shailesh Kumar Jaiswal and Shri Sukdhev Singh Sidhu, were partners in M/s S.S. Cargo Movers. M/s S.S. Cargo Movers is also a constituent firm of M/s Godawari Deify SSCM, a joint venture. It is M/s SS Cargo Movers which was a constituent firm of aforementioned joint venture. It is not only the aforementioned two Directors of petitioner company were partners of M/s SS Cargo Movers but there were three other partners also. In writ petition there is no pleading with regard to present status of M/s SS Cargo Movers whether it is still in existence or not and whether above named two Directors of petitioner company have separated themselves from the partnership firm M/s SS Cargo Movers along with equipments and resources to the extent of their shares with the said firm. It is not the case of the petitioner that M/s SS Cargo Movers merged with petitioner company with its experience and credentials.