Terumo Penpol Pvt. Ltd. v. Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Ltd.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 3431 of 2017 • Terumo Penpol Pvt. Ltd.I-2, Jawahar Nagar, Kowdiar P. O. Thiruvananthapuram, 695003 ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Ltd. 3rd Floor, Govind Sarang Vyavasayik Parisar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Director, Medical Health, Services, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :

Shri Krishnan Ramesh and Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate For Respondents :

Shri CJK Rao, Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Order on Board Per Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan , Chief Justice 15.12.2017 1) This Writ Petition is by one who had submitted a tender in response to an NIT.

2) We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for respondent- 1, which had invited the tenders. 3) It is the undisputed position that earnest money deposit of Rs.3,33,000/- had to be provided by the tenderer. The petitioner, in its wisdom, took recourse to RTGS (Real Time Gross Settlement) transfer for the said amount. However, the banker transferred an amount of Rs.3,30,000/-. It appears that thereafter the banker made a separate transfer of Rs.3,000/-. Collectively, the amounts will come to Rs.3,33,000/-. But, the first respondent is dealing with the tenders through

wpc-3431 of 2017 E-tender process and from stage to stage, it proceeds on the basis of data that becomes available to the e-processing system. Therefore, though the petitioner states that there is no fault that could be attributed to it and the banker's action may be taken as bona fide mistake, as has been clarified by the bank; in the realm of such contracts through E-tendering process, it may not be possible for us to issue any direction to the first respondent to put the clock back, or to reconsider the offer of the petitioner from the stage of which EMD (Earnest Money Deposit) scrutiny was made. We have taken a similar view in yet another matter relating to contracts with the Chhattisgarh Civil Supplies Corporation in Writ Petition (C) No. 1715 of 2017 (M/s. Surya Road Lines Vs. Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited and Ors.) decided on 04.07.2017. We are, therefore, inclined to dismiss this Writ Petition.

4) In the result, this Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan) (Sharad Kumar Gupta) Chief Justice Judge padma