9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 486 - HC - Indian LawsAcceptance of bid in a tender for providing manpower based on pricing and inclusion of GST - Scope of judicial review - HELD THAT - It is not in dispute that the petitioner nos.1 and 2 have quoted a bid of 1.18, as against which, the bid of the respondent no.2, was of 1.03 which would indicate that the bid of the respondent no.2, was less than that of the petitioner nos.1 and 2. It would be clear from the language of clause 10 (B) of the NIT that the GST, would be payable, over and above this figure, as the NIT does not indicate the GST to be included in the financial bid, it being a statutory imposition, which is payable, by every successful bidder, over and above, the bid amount. The principles of judicial review in tender matters, are very narrow and it is not permissible for the Court, to read into the terms of the NIT, which is not reflected. There are no merit in the present petition so as to interfere - petition dismissed.
Issues involved: Challenge to acceptance of bid in a tender for providing manpower based on pricing and inclusion of GST.
Details of the Judgment: 1. Pricing Discrepancy Issue: - The petition challenged the acceptance of respondent No.2's bid in a tender for providing manpower, as it was lower than the petitioner's bid which included GST in the service charges. - Petitioner argued that respondent No.2's bid, though lower, would be less than 1% of the amount specified in the tender document if GST was deducted, making it non-responsive. - Respondent No.1 defended the acceptance of the bid, stating that the service charge only needed to be at least 1% of the total amount specified in the tender, and GST was to be paid separately. 2. Interpretation of Tender Terms Issue: - The note appended to the tender clause specified that the service charge should not be less than 1% of the figure mentioned in the tender document, without mentioning GST inclusion. - Respondent No.2 argued that since the tender document did not require GST to be included in the bid, their offer of 1.03% service charge was compliant and rightly accepted. - The court noted that the tender terms did not explicitly state that GST should be part of the financial bid, and the bid evaluation did not include GST in the calculations. 3. Judicial Review and Contract Award Issue: - The court emphasized the narrow scope of judicial review in tender matters, stating that terms not explicitly mentioned in the tender document cannot be imposed. - The contract had already been awarded to respondent No.2, and the work had commenced, leading the court to dismiss the petition as there was no merit to interfere based on the arguments presented. In conclusion, the High Court of Bombay dismissed the petition challenging the acceptance of the bid in a manpower tender, ruling that the bid of respondent No.2 was compliant with the tender terms, which did not require GST to be included in the financial bid. The court highlighted the limited scope of judicial review in tender matters and upheld the award of the contract to respondent No.2.
|
