9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Preliminary Objection on Maintainability of Writ Petition by Foreign Companies 2. Applicability of Article 14 of the Constitution 3. Allegations of Arbitrary and Unfair Treatment in Tender Process 4. Compliance with Tender Document Clauses 5. Evaluation of Bids Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Preliminary Objection on Maintainability of Writ Petition by Foreign Companies: The respondents raised a preliminary objection arguing that the petitioners, being foreign companies, were not entitled to the protection of fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The court, however, noted that Article 14, which embodies the principles of equality before law and equal protection of laws, is available to all persons, including foreigners. The court cited the Supreme Court's decision in Basheshar Nath Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, which established that Article 14 applies to any person within the territory of India. Consequently, the preliminary objection was overruled. 2. Applicability of Article 14 of the Constitution: The court emphasized that Article 14 ensures that the State metes out just, fair, and reasonable treatment to every individual within the territory of India. The State cannot act arbitrarily or capriciously, and its decisions must be informed by reason, equality, justice, and fair play. The court referenced several Supreme Court decisions, including Erusian Equipment and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal and Ramana Dayaram Shetty vs. The International Airport Authority of India, which held that government actions, including the award of contracts, must conform to the norms and standards flowing from Article 14. 3. Allegations of Arbitrary and Unfair Treatment in Tender Process: The petitioners alleged that the first respondent treated the Consortium unfairly by waiving certain terms of the tender document in favor of the third respondent, thereby giving it an advantage in price. The court examined the specific allegations, including deviations from the Project Time Schedule and training requirements. It was concluded that the first respondent's interpretation of the site acceptance test as a stage prior to the commissioning of the total system was fair and bona fide. The court also found no merit in the petitioners' contention regarding the training of personnel, as Raytheon had provided for training both in Delhi and the USA. 4. Compliance with Tender Document Clauses: The petitioners argued that the third respondent's bid should have been rejected at the threshold for taking exceptions to five clauses in the tender document. The court analyzed the relevant clauses and concluded that the term "exception" in clause 27.3.8 meant total or virtual omission or exclusion, not deviations. Since the tender document permitted deviations, the third respondent's bid was not disqualified for making certain deviations. The court also noted that both the Consortium and Raytheon had made deviations in their revised offers, and the first respondent had evaluated these deviations in a fair manner. 5. Evaluation of Bids: The court reviewed the evaluation process and found that the Empowered Committee had conducted a thorough and fair assessment of the bids. The evaluation included technical presentations, consideration of additional items, and a comparative statement of the bids. The court emphasized that the evaluation of bids is a technical matter best left to experts. The petitioners' grievances regarding depot spares and discount factors were addressed by the Empowered Committee, which found Raytheon's bid to be lower than that of the Consortium. The court concluded that there was no arbitrary exercise of power in the evaluation process and dismissed the writ petition. Conclusion: The writ petition was dismissed as the court found no merit in the allegations of arbitrary and unfair treatment, and the evaluation of bids was conducted in a fair and reasonable manner. The court upheld the principles of Article 14, ensuring that the State's actions conformed to the norms of equality, justice, and fair play.
|
