Saibal Chatterjee v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

31-07-2025 Item No.21 AGM IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side WPA No. 17080 of 2025 Saibal Chatterjee -vsThe State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Malay Bhattacharyya.

Mr. Subhrajyoti Ghosh.

...for the petitioner Mr. Shamim-Ul-Bari.

Ms. Indrani Nandi.

...for the State

1. Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be kept with the records.

2. The petitioner participated in the tender process floated by the Chief Medical Officer of Health, Hooghly. The petitioner's name has been enlisted as L2 and L4 in respect of the two items in which the petitioner submitted its bid.

3. Specific submission of the petitioner is that the financial bid summary shows same figures in respect of all the bidders. The Authority could not have selected one by disregarding the other. The petitioner is already providing services to the hospital and prays that he may be permitted to continue to provide service.

4. It has been submitted that the tender document contains a provision for giving preference to the bidders who have registered office or branch office in the city/district of the health facility. Allegation is that none of the selected bidders have their registered office in the city/district of the health

facility. The petitioner objects to the selection of the alleged successful bidder.

5. Learned advocate representing the State respondents has obtained instruction from the tender issuing authority. Documents have been placed before this Court to show that though the bid summary shows only two digits of the figure, but the actual bid summary consist four digits. The difference between the bids submitted by the petitioner and the L1 bidder is huge.

6. The bid submitted by the petitioner is 0.01% and the bid accepted is 0.0001%.

7. Learned advocate for the State respondents have produced documents to show that the bid of the L1 bidder has been accepted and the work order has also been issued.

8. In view of the above, the Court is not inclined to exercise jurisdiction in the matter.

9. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

10. As regards the preference to be given to the bidders having registered or the branch office in the city/district of the health facility, it will be open for the petitioner to raise objection before the authority with supporting documents.

11. Certified copy of this order, if applied for, shall be made available to the parties.

[Amrita Sinha, J]