Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (0.29 seconds)

Food & Beverage Foundation Society & ... vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors. on 11 July, 2011

5. Mr. Bhushan submitted that many of the Petitioner organizations had vast experience in supply of mid-day meals („MDMs‟) to children either under the ICDS or otherwise in different states in the country. Turning to the selection of Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and certain other NPOs, Mr. Bhushan submitted that their selection smacks of arbitrariness and mala fide. One such NPO, viz, Ray Welfare Trust (`RWT‟) clearly did not have a functional unit in Delhi and had yet been preferred for award of the contract. As regards two other NPOs, viz., Stri Shakti Sangathan (`SSS‟) and Rao Raghubir Foundation (`RRF‟), there were earlier instances of food poisoning suffered by children in schools where MDMs were supplied by these two organizations. There was an FIR registered and criminal cases instituted against SSS, the details of which were not provided by SSS to the GNCTD at the time of submitting its application pursuant to the EOI. On this short ground SSS should have been disqualified. As regards RRF, it is submitted that its selection was contrary to the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2714 of 2010 [Harit Recyclers Association v. Union of India, order dated 3rd June 2010]. In which this Court had emphasised that the State was under obligation to select proper persons with unblemished record of service. As regards the other selected NPO, Anmol, it is submitted that it had given wrong facts as regards its turnover. In the inspection report concerning Anmol no mention was made of the staff strength and functions whereas the absence of these details was held against the Petitioners. As regards Jan Chetana Jagriti Avam Shaikshanik Vikas Manch and Nav Prayas, it was submitted that these were sister concerns and most of their office bearers were the same. Bharat Ratna Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Society and Dalit Prahari were also stated to have the same registered address and their office bearers were related to each other. Further, Mr. Jayant Bhushan submitted that the Review Committee which went over the earlier recommendations of the Selection-cum- Screening Committee did not have the presence of two independent persons, viz, Dr. Salila Thomas and Dr. Kalyan Singh from the Food and Nutrition Department, Lady Irwin College. One of the special invitees Mr. Harsh Mander was also not present during the review exercise undertaken by the Committee. It was submitted that the GNCTD had acted at its whims and fancies and selected Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 W.P. (C) No. 8210 & 580 of 2011 Page 3 of 13 NGOs/NPOs in an arbitrary and mala fide manner. It is submitted that there has been a gross violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Delhi High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - S Muralidhar - Full Document
1