R744 , 2006 (2 )CTLJ247 (SC ), 2006 INSC 750 , JT2006 (10 )SC 131 , 2006 (11 )SCALE526 , (2006 )11 SCC548 , [2006 ]Supp(8 )SCR11 , ,MANU/SC/8598/2006S.B. Sinha#Dalveer Bhandari#2504SC3250Judgment/OrderAIR#BomCR#CTLJ#INSC#JT#MANU#SCALE#SCC#SCR(Supp)S.B. Sinha,Services Sector#Services SectorSUPREME COURT OF INDIA2012-9-24Power of High Courts to issue certain writs,The High Court in the States,The States,Power of High Courts to issue certain writs,The High Court in the States,The States,Constitution of India17163 -->

MANU/SC/8598/2006

True Court CopyTM English

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 4613 of 2006 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 24879 of 2005)

Decided On: 31.10.2006

Appellants: B.S.N. Joshi and Sons Ltd. Vs. Respondent: Nair Coal Services Ltd. and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
S.B. Sinha and Dalveer Bhandari

JUDGMENT

S.B. Sinha, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. A notice inviting tender was issued by the Maharashtra State Electricity Board, now known as 'Maharashtra State Power General Co. Ltd.' (for short, MAHAGENCO'), inter alia, for coal liaisoning, quality and quantity supervision for its Thermal Power Station on 03.03.2005. Indisputably, coal is used as a primary fuel for generation of electrical energy in the power stations belonging to MAHAGENCO where for coal is procured from various coal mines belonging to Government Companies including Western Coalfields Ltd., South Eastern Coalfields Ltd., Mahanadi Coal Ltd. and Singareni Collieries Ltd.

3. Pursuant to and in furtherance of the said notice inviting tender, Appellant herein as also Respondent Nos. 1, 4 and 5 submitted their tenders. Tender of Appellant herein was accepted by MAHAGENCO. Estimated amount of contract as per MSPGCL was Rs. 4842.25 per M.T. The rates quoted by the respective parties are as under:

On the premise that Appellant herein failed to fulfill the essential qualifications as contained in Para 1.5(ii), 1.5(v) and 1.5(vii) of the notice inviting tender, a writ petition was filed by First Respondent before the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court. The said writ petition has been allowed by a Division Bench of the High Court by reason of the impugned judgment quashing the order awarding contract in favour of Appellant.

4. Indisputably, the tender documents were in two parts : (a) technical bid; and (b) financial bid. Ordinarily, nine conditions mentioned therein were required to be fulfilled by the bidders before their respective financial bids could be opened. As indicated hereinbefore, according to First Respondent, Appellant did not fulfill the essential conditions laid down in the technical bid and, thus, was ineligible for being considered for awarding the said contract.

The relevant provisions of the notice inviting tender are as under:

(ii) The Bidder should have executed the work of total minimum quantity of 5 (Five) Million Metric Tons per year for preceding 5 years. Besides this bidder should have executed the work of total quantity of 10 (ten) Million MT's in any of the preceding 5 (Five) years. Above execution of work should be on behalf of State Electricity Board and/or NTPC and/or other State or Central Undertaking and/or the private Power Generating Companies as their liaison agent/coal agent, with regard to receipt and supply of the coal including supervision on ........