← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/20077/2022allowed

M/S. Ahilam Travels v. The Union Of India

2023-01-10Honourable Mr Justice G.R.Swaminathan8 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 10.01.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.14607, 14610 and 18192 of 2022 M/s. Ahilam Travels, Rep. by its Proprietor, R.Ahilan.

... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Union of India, Rep by its Director/Chief Executive Officer, Ministry of Commerce and Industry Government, E Market Place (Gem) (Section), Vanjiya Bhawan, New Delhi - 110 011.

2.The Site Director, Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, (A Govt of India Enterprise), Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project, Kudankulam Post, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District - 627 106.

3.The Station Director, Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, (A Govt of India Enterprise), Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project, Kudankulam Post, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District - 627 106.

4. The Head (CTC), (Tender Section), Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, 1/8

(A Govt of India Enterprise), Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project, Kudankulam Post, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District - 627 106.

5 The Scientific Officer-E (CTC), Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, (A Govt of India Enterprise), Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project, Kudankulam Post, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District - 627 106.

... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent in his proceedings in no. NPCIL/KKNPP/CTC/2022/ S/2031 dated 10.8.2022 and consequential impugned order passed by the 5th respondent in his proceedings in No.NPCIL/KKNPP/CTC/2022/ S/2101 dated 19.08.2022 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially to direct the respondents to open with the petitioner's technical bid and proceed further with the tender process by accepting the petitioner's technical bid within a period stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.Ajmalkhan, For M/s.Ajmal Associates.

For Respondents : Mr.V.B.Sundhareshwar, Central Govt. Standing Counsel for R1.

Mr.Krishna Srinivasan, For M/s.Ramasubramanian & Associates for R2 to R5. 2/8

ORDER

Heard the learned senior counsel for the writ petitioner, the learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the first respondent and the learned standing counsel for the respondents 2 to 5.

2.The respondent corporation issued notification dated 08.06.

Operating Item No 7 on Holidays for 9 hrs duty with SCHEDULED QUANTITIES Are 120 Vehicle Day, Custom Bid for Services - ITEM NO 9 Supply of brand new Mahindra Bolero Camper for 24 hrs duty with 1500 kms on Monthly basis on hire with SCHEDULED QUANTITIES ARE 240 Vehicle Month, Custom Bid for Services - ITEM NO 10 For item 7 and 9 rate per km beyon 1500 kms running SCHEDULED QUANTITIES ARE 90000 Kilometer, Custom Bid for Services ITEM NO 11 For item no 1 and 4 and 7 rate per hour for the vehicle on duty beyond 9 hours SCHEDULED QUANTITIES ARE 3600 Hour, Custom Bid for Services - ITEM NO 12 supply of brand new Modified AC Traveller for 24 hrs duty with 500 kms on monthly basis on hire with SCHDUDLED QUANTITIES ARE 60 Vehicle Month, Custom Bid for Services ITEM NO 13 for item 12 rate per km beyond 500 kms running with SCHDULED QUANTITIES ARE 12000 Kilometer.

3.The writ petitioner applied in response thereto. The petitioner failed to opt under the MSE category. An MSE participant is exempted from paying EMD. The petitioner under erroneous impression that he had opted under the MSE category, failed to pay the EMD and thus, he was disqualified. Challenging his disqualification, the present writ petition has been filed. 4.When the matter was taken for hearing on 30.08.2022, the following interim order was passed:- "Mr.V.B.Sundhareshwar, learned Central Government Standing Counsel takes notice for the first respondent. 4/8

2. Issue notice to the respondents 2 to 5 returnable by 09.09.2022. Private notice is also permitted.

3. Mr.Ajmal Khan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner applied in response to the tender notification issued by the second respondent. The petitioner applied under MSE Category and hence, is exempted from paying any EMD. However, on the ground that the petitioner has not applied for MSE purchase preference and that he had not paid the bid security amount, he had been disqualified.

4. The learned Senior Counsel draws my attention to Page No.29 of the typed set of papers indicating that the petitioner had already been registered as MSE on the GeM Portal. He also draws my attention to the document uploaded in this regard. Prima facie, I am satisfied that the petitioner had been erroneously disqualified.

5. This Writ Petition was listed for admission yesterday, i.e., on 29.08.2022. The learned Central Government Standing Counsel took notice for the first respondent. I called upon the learned Central Government Standing Counsel to inform the NPCIL about the listing of the case today, i.e., on 30.08.2022. The learned Central Government Standing Counsel informs me that he sent an E-mail yesterday itself, i.e., on 29.08.2022 and 5/8

they told over phone that they are appointing an independent counsel. The tender inviting authorities are aware that the Writ Petition is being listed for hearing today, i.e., on 30.08.2022. Unfortunately, there is no response. Since prima facie materials have been placed before me indicating that the disqualification of the petitioner is not sustainable, I restrain the respondents 2 to 5 from confirming the petition mentioned tender process.

6. Call the matter on 09.09.2022."

The respondents have filed a petition for vacating the interim order. 5.After hearing the learned counsel on either side, I am of the view that issue can be easily resolved. The fact remains that the petitioner is an MSE. It is not in dispute. In fact, the petitioner furnished udyam registration certificate also. His failure to opt under the MSE category appears to have been an inadvertent and condonable error. I, therefore, direct the respondents to condone the same. Once the petitioner's lapse is condoned, he is very much entitled to participate in the bid process. The petitioner's bid will be considered on merits and in accordance with law along with other participants. 6/8

6.The writ petition is allowed on these terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 10.01.2023 NCS :Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias Issue order copy on 12.01.2023.

7/8

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

ias 10.01.2023 (2/2) 8/8