M/s Dinesh Chandra Patni vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J

The petitioner was one of the bidders who participated in a bid process, for a works contract, which is to be given by the employer i.e. Uttarakhand

Rural Road Development Agency for the construction of a motor road.

It was a two bid process and financial bid of only those bidders were to be opened who were first declared technically qualified. There were in total

six bidders. Out of six, four bidders were technically disqualified, including the present petitioner. The financial bid of the remaining two bidders had to

be opened. The financial bid has not yet been opened.

Meanwhile, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition alleging arbitrariness, favouritism etc., at the hands of the

respondent employer i.e. Uttarakhand Rural Road Development Agency.

The case of the petitioner before this Court is that initially he was declared disqualified on ground that he had not submitted his experience

certificate and after the representation was made by the petitioner in this regard, these objections were recalled. But again the petitioner in any case

has been made disqualified vide order dated 20.08.2019 on grounds that the petitioner in his bid document has not disclosed the share of his work as a

Joint Venture, which he had done with Patni Engineering and Construction Joint Venture where Dinesh Chandra Patni was a partner of 50% along

with Bhopal Singh and Mahesh Chandra Joshi with partnership of 25% each.

The case of the petitioner, however, is that for the said Joint Venture work although the petitioner had applied as a Joint Venture along with other

partners and the petitioner was the leading partner but the other partners left the project mid-way and the project was completed only single handedly

by the petitioner, for which he has given a certificate, which does not disclose that there was any share of work, and rightly so since the entire work

was done by him.

Let the respondent authorities appreciate this aspect as to whether the certificate was rightly given to the petitioner, considering the certificate was

given to the petitioner by none else but by the present employer i.e. Uttarakhand Rural Road Development Agency, who will be in a better position to

examine the merit of the claim of the petitioner.

Let a decision be taken within a week from the date of production of a certified copy of this order and thereafter the contract be concluded in

accordance with law.

In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed.

Let a certified copy of this order be supplied within twenty-four hours on payment of usual charges.