Contractor cannot claim that the important instructions for bidders were not available online after participating and getting rejected: HC
JKUT (Jammu), October-01-2021-( JNF):- The Jammu & Kashmir High Court holds that Contractor cannot claim that the important instructions for bidders were not available online after participating and getting rejected.
The petitioner Mohd Shafi Khan petitioner has challenged the order/letter of allotment of contract issued under No. SEHU/2073-77 dated 21¬08-2014 pertaining to construction of flood protection work on both sides of Jageer Narh Nallah (Pyt Dewal Doga) with the estimated cost/amount of work as per NIT Rs. 26.39 lacs issued in favour of respondent No. 5 and order/letter of allotment of contract issued under No. MIDD/1865-68 dated 13-08-2014 pertaining to work of the Construction of Flood Protection on Left Side of Osha Nallah (Panchayat Dewal Doga) with the estimated cost/amount of work as per NIT Rs. 17.67 lacs, issued in favour of respondent No. 6, despite the fact that the petitioner has been the lowest tenderer in both the contracts mentioned above.
Justice Rajnesh Oswal after hearing AAG Aseem Sawhney for the UT observed that A perusal of the aforesaid instruction reveals that if after opening the tender, rates of the tenderers are found less than 15% of the advertised amount and additional CDR @ 5% is not enclosed with the tender document, the tender is liable to be rejected. It is admitted fact that the petitioner has not furnished the additional CDR @ 5% along with the tender document. The contention of the petitioner is that the said Instructions were not available online at the time of casting of bids. The petitioner cannot claim that the important instructions for bidders were not available online, so he was not aware of the same because of the simple reason that a specific reference to the instructions to bidders has been made in both the e-NITs and further once the same were not available online at that point of time, he should have brought it to the notice of the official respondents and not having done so, the petitioner cannot raise the said issue now when the works have been allotted to the private respondents. JNF