Sabita Mandal v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

ML 02 10.02.2025 d.p.

In The High Court At Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side W.P.A 974 of 2025 Sabita Mandal -versus The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Gangadhar Das, Mr. Tanmoy Chattopadhyay, Ms. Shreya Banerjee.

...For the Petitioner.

Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee, Mr. Amrita Lal Chatterjee.

...For the State.

Ms. Sarmila Das, Mr. Jagajyoti Guha.

...For the Respondent Nos. 3 and 8.

Mr. Atarup Banerjee, Mr. Rajdeep Pramanik.

...For the Intervenors.

1.

The petitioner is aggrieved by rejection of her bid on the ground that her credential is not as per the requirement of the Executive rank.

2.

Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Tender Issuing Authority refers to the eligibility criteria of the Notice Inviting Tender which mentions that no credential will be considered as valid unless it is supported by payment certificate, work order, price schedule or BOQ of work and completion certificate issued by the competent authority not below the rank of the Executive Engineer.

3.

It has been submitted that the petitioner did not submit any document from any authority as mentioned in the eligibility criteria.

4.

It has further been brought to the notice of the Court that according to Clause 26 of the Notice Inviting Tender, if there is any query regarding the tender terms, BOQ's or any other issues it should be communicated on or before the pre-bid meeting. After the pre-bid meeting no queries will be entertained. 5.

It has been submitted that the petitioner did not participate in the pre-bid meeting.

6.

Clause 27 of the NIT has been placed which mentions that in case of any objection regarding qualifying an agency, the same should be lodged before the Executive Engineer within two days from the date of publication of the list of qualified agencies and no objection will be entertained beyond the said time schedule.

7.

It appears that instead the drawing the attention of the concerned authority, the petitioner has rushed to this Court. The petitioner ought to have availed the remedy as already mentioned in the Notice Inviting Tender.

8.

The Court is not inclined to exercise jurisdiction in this matter.

9. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

10. Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities.

( Amrita Sinha, J.)