Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5. It is also pointed out that on yet another occasion, when the respondents had shown an inclination/preference for Asbestos Cement Pressure Pipes manufactured by "Mazza" process for certain sizes of pipes, their action was challenged by a manufacturer in Mumbai and the said writ petition was disposed of on the basis of an undertaking that the competent authority shall have the samples of pipes, with a diameter of more than 100 mm, tested in a suitable laboratory and further action with regard to invitations to tender shall be taken in the light of the report by the laboratory. It is averred that pursuant to the said order, respondents No. 1 and 2 got the pipes tested from Shri Ram Test House, Delhi on one meter length pipe. Whereas the pipes manufactured by "Mazza" process failed the tests, the pipes manufactured by "Magnani" process passed. It is alleged that since these results did not find favour with respondents No. 1 to 3, the test reports were rejected on the hyper-technical plea that the samples were not drawn in conformity with the requirement of IS Code, namely, being less than 4 meters in length. It is the say of the petitioners that they have been manufacturing pipes, using thin lamination of maximum thinckess of 0.35mm; with an automatic process, as specified under note (ii) of Schedule 'A' of the tender; the pipes manufactured by them meet the BIS specifications, namely, IS 1592/2003, as amended up to date, and they are all certified under ISO 9000 series, yet the additional condition of use of particular machines and equipments, such as "Vat, sieve cylinder, synthetic felt, heating tunnel" and its certification under note No. iii, in the prescribed form, extracted above, is an indirect attempt to oust the members of petitioner No. 4 and about 40 other similar manufacturers of AC Pressure pipes, which employ Automated Lamination Process or other types of machines, from the tendering process. It is alleged that the insertion of the impugned condition is a deliberate attempt on the part of respondents No. 1 to 3, at the behest of the " manufacturers, using the afore-named machines, described as "Mazza" machines, to somehow oust the petitioners from the tendering process, which action is arbitrary, unreasonable, illegal and unconstitutional. It is claimed that insofar as the quality of the product is concerned, there is really no distinction between the two processes, as all the manufacturers employ the process of formation of pipes layer by layer, i.e. controlled lamination to ensure uniform and think layer formation; dewatering to the desired level and application of optimum hydraulic pressure for achieving the required density. In nut shell, the stand of the petitioners is that prescription and user of specific machines or their parts in there manufacturing process, as an essential tender condition, is not only irrational, it is mala fide attempt on the part of the respondents to eliminate a vast majority of pipes manufacturers, thereby creating a monopolistic situation for a very few manufacturers, who would be eligible to tender, leading to lack of competitiveness in the tendering process and fall in standards of quality of the pipes to be procured for supply of drinking water.