LexSHREE SHYAMJI TRANSPORT COMPANY versus FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2014] 12 S.C.R. 179
SHREE SHYAMJI TRANSPORT COMPANY
v.
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 9379 of 2014)
OCTOBER 9, 2014.
[T.S. THAKUR AND R. BANUMATHI, JJ.)
Tender - Non-consideration of bid of appellant-tenderer
A
8
- Invoking disqualification condition on the ground that his
Earnest Money Deposit was forfeited in an earlier tender -
C
Held: Debarment of the tenderer was not justifiable on the
basis of earlier case - In that case default was not on account
of the tenderer.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
D
HELD: While considering the appellant's tender for
Mandi Labour Contract, the respondent-Corporation was
not justified in invoking Clause 4 (Ill) of the
Disqualification Conditions of Model Tender Form, on the
ground that the tender of the appellants pertaining to
E
Road Transport Contract was earlier rejected and that
appellant's Earnest Money Deposit was forfeited. Insofar
as Road Transport Contract Hathin-Rajasthan is
concerned, the High Court had found that there was no
intentional lapse on the part of the appellant and that
delay in furnishing the security and bank guarantee was
F
on account of failure of banking operation, and that order
attained finality. Therefore, the debarment of the
appellants is not justifiable. [Para 11, 12) [185-E, H; 186-
A, CJ
G
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
9379 of 2014.
From the Judgment & Order dated 26.07.2012 of the High
179
H
180
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2014] 12 S.C.R.
A Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Writ
Petition No. 8415 of 2012.
WITH
C.A. No. 9380 of 2014.
B
Jasbir Singh Malik, S.K. Sabharwal for the Appellant.
Ajit Pudussery, J. Pudussery, K. Vijayan, Shruti S. Hazarika
for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
C
R. BANUMATHI, J. 1. Leave granted. These appeals
arise out of common order of the Punjab and Haryana High
Court dated 26.7.2012 passed in CWP Nos. 8415/2012 &
841612012 whereby the High Court declined to interfere with
the action of the Food Corporation of India {FCI) rejecting
0 tender of the appellants-firms.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of these appeals are as
follows:- The appellants are partnership firms having' five
partners. Respondent No. 2 - FCI invited tenders for Mandi
Labour Contract {MLC) for its centres at Uchana, Sonepat,
E Narwana and Safidon and the appellants applied for the tender.
The tender consisted of two parts - technical bid and price bid.
As per the procedure, on successfully qualifying the technical
bid, the price bid was to be opened. The appellants were
eligible in technical bid theretiy making themselves qualified for.
opening of price bid. The said price bid was opened on
F 2.3.2012. The appellants' bid was not considered by FCI, in
view of the fact that in the earlier tender of Road Transport
Contract {RTC) of Hathin-Rajasthan, the appellants had failed
to deposit the security deposit and bank guarantee within the~•
stipulated period as required and the Earnest Money Deposit
G {EMO) of the appellants had been forfeited vide Order dated
5.11.2011 and hence, the appellants' MLC tender was rejected
invoking sub clause {Ill) of Clause 4 of the Disqualification
Conditions. According to the __ appellants, earlier tender of the
appellants was rejected by an Order dated 5.11.2011 invoking
H Clause 7 of the Model Tender Form (MTF). The appel!ant-Shree
. SHREE SHYAMJI TRANSPORT COMPANY v. FOOD 181
CORPORATION OF INDIA [R. BANUMATHI, J.]
Shyamji Transport Company challenged the said Order dated
A
5.11.2011 by filing CWP No.21694/2011 which was disposed
of by Order dated 6.3.2012 in which the Court observed that
FCI had not invoked Clause 7 of the MTF to debar the
appellant-Shree Shyamji Transport Company for the contract
period and the apprehension of the appellant was ill-founded.
B
In the light, of the observations in CWP No.21694/2011,
appellants contend that the Order dated 21.3.2012 rejecting the
appellants' tender for MLC invoking Clause 4 (Ill) is
unsustainable.
3. Challenging action of the respondents - FCI in not
C
considering their MLC tender, the appellants filed two writ
petitions bearing Nos. CWP 8415/2012 and 8416/2012 to
quash the communication dated 21.3.2012 and also prayed for
consideration of their price bid with regard to MLC tender dated
14.3.2012. The High Court dismissed the writ petitions by a
D
common Order dated 26.7.2012, interalia, Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.