Gujarat High Court High Court

S.Mark vs Oil on 4 August, 2008

Gujarat High Court
S.Mark vs Oil on 4 August, 2008
Author: R.M.Doshit,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice D.Dave,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/992820/2008	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9928 of 2008
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

S.MARK
INDUSTRIES & 2 - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

OIL
AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
MB GANDHI for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 3. 
None for Respondent(s) : 1 -
3. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MS. JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE SHARAD D.DAVE
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 04/08/2008 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT)

Heard
the learned advocate.

The
petitioners, the former contractors with the respondent Oil and
Natural Gas Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as, the
Corporation ), have
preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India to challenge the bid evaluation system adopted by the
Corporation for giving contracts for laying the oil pipelines.

Mr.Gandhi
has submitted that for past 20 years or more the Corporation had
adopted policy to distribute the tender work amongst several
contractors including the petitioners. That system had served the
Corporation well. However, recently, the Corporation has, in Mehsana
Division, adopted the new policy known as bid evaluation system. The
said system has in-built lacunae. The petitioners and other
contractors had pointed out such lacunae and had called upon the
Corporation to continue with the old system. Nevertheless, the
Corporation proceeded further with the tender process. It invited the
tenders and amongst those who submitted the tenders, two contractors
have been awarded contract in the proportion of 66% and 34% of
contract work. The petitioners have, thus, been ousted from the
contract work.

Though
it is alleged that the bid evaluation system is adopted/evolved with
malafide intention, no malafide has been established/demonstrated.
Which system the Corporation should adopt is for the Corporation to
decide. A court of law is not required to examine the
viability/feasibility of such system or whether the Corporation could
have evolved a better system. Moreover, it is not in dispute that the
petitioners did not submit their respective bid. Nor did they
participate in the tender process. The petitioners, therefore, in our
view, have no locus standi either to challenge the system adopted by
the Corporation or to challenge the action of the Corporation in
giving contract to the respondents nos.2 and 3.

For
the aforesaid reasons, the petition is dismissed. The registry will
send the writ of this order to the respondent no.1.

 

 


 

(Sharad
D.Dave, J.)			  (Ms.R.M.Doshit, J.)
 

/moin

    

 
	   
      
      
	    
		      
	   
      
	  	    
		   Top