Naveen Agarwal vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Sharad Kumar Sharma, J

This is a second phase of litigation. Initially, the petitioner has preferred a writ petition, being Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1806 of 2021, contending thereof that in pursuance to the invitation of the bids by virtue of a notice dated 22.03.2021, when the petitioner attempted to purchase the tender document, he was declined to be given, with the tender documents, hence he had filed the writ petition, which was disposed of on 09.09.2021.

Since the grievance of the petitioner still remained un-redressed, and as he was denied with the tender documents to be purchased by him, he filed the present writ petition for the following reliefs:-

"i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing/ setting aside the tender notices published in Dainik Jagran and Hindustan News Papers on 28.08.2021 & 29.08.2021, inviting the tenders for freight/loading haul collection/ recovery through certain marked centers at Development Block level in the Udham Singh Nagar District for the year of 2022-23 and remaining period of year 2021-22 (contained as Annexure no. 1 to this writ petition.

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing/ setting aside the entire tender process which is going to be finalized shortly in pursuance to the tender notices published in Dainik Jagran and Hindustan News Papers on 28.08.2021 & 29.08.2021, inviting the tenders for freight/loading haul collection/ recovery through certain marked centers at Development Block level in the Udham Singh Nagar District for the year of 2022-23 and remaining period of year 2021-22

iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding /directing the respondent No. 1 to direct the respondent No. 2 to initiated tender process under his own direction and supervision for the purpose of fair and transparent tender process or the respondent No. 1 be directed to appoint another officer to initiate fair and transparent tender process by providing due opportunities to participate the petitioner in the aforesaid tender process.

iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding /directing the respondent No. 1 to direct the respondent No. 2 to initiated tender process under his own direction and supervision for the purpose of fair and transparent tender process or the respondent No. 1 be directed to appoint another officer to initiate fair and transparent tender process by providing due opportunities to participate the petitioner in the aforesaid tender process.

v) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding /directing the respondent No. 2 to issue afresh tender notice to conduct the fair, transparent and competitive tender process de-novo under his supervision.

vi) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding /directing the respondent No. 2 & 3 to secure the CCTV footage of the CCTV cameras installed in the premises of the Jila Panchayat Udham Singh Nagar for dated 03.09.2021, 09.09.2021 and 10.09.2021 and produce the same before the Hon'ble High Court.

vii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/ directing the respondent No. 1 to initiate the inquiry of anomalies adopted by respondent No. 3 and 4 in the tender process through SIT or any other independent agency.

viii) Issue any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case be passed in favour of the petitioner.

ix) Cost of the petition be awarded in favour of the petitioner."

The petitioner's counsel has principally argued that the entire tendering process, which was resorted to by the respondents, in pursuance to the impugned publications i.e. invitation of bids dated 28.08.2021 and 29.08.2021, for the purposes of floating the contract for ladan dhulan charges, the same was in violation of Rule 35 of the Uttarakhand Procurement Rules, 2017, for the reason being that since the total amount, for which the tender was invited was reflected to be Rs. 17.5 lakh, hence in view of the provisions contained under Rule 35 of the Procurement Rules of 2017, if at all any tendering process was to be resorted to for any contract above the value of Rs. 2.5 lakh, it has to be invited through E-tendering process.

Yesterday, when the matter was taken up, the learned counsel for the respondents orally submitted, that on the basis of the instructions, which has been received by the respondents, they did not deny the fact, that the invitation of bids which has been made by the impugned publications, was without recourse to the process provided under Rule 35 of the Procurement Rules of 2017.

In that view of the matter, in order to place the instructions before the Court on the request of the respondents the matter was posted for today.

Today, Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, the learned counsel for the respondent has placed on record a communication, which has been made by the President, District Panchayat, Udham Singh Nagar, vide his communication No. 2170/ft0ia0 - ynku<qyku&fufonk@2021-22 fnukad 20-09-2021 whereby the tenders, which were invited in pursuance to the impugned publications, which are under challenge in the writ petition, has been cancelled, since they being not in consonance to the provisions contained under Rule 35 of the Procurement Rules of 2017.

In view of the aforesaid communication, which has been taken on record and would be treated as to be the part of the writ petition, since now the tendering process has been cancelled, the petitioner's grievance stands redressed. Hence, as such on that premise itself, this writ petition is closed, as no further orders are required to be passed on the same.