Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 568 (JK)

Ravinder Singh v. Indian Oil Corporation

2020-11-05

RAJESH BINDAL

body2020
Judgment Rajesh Bindal, J.—The petitioners have filed the present petition impugning the tender notice No. RCC/NR/PSO/OPS/PT-141/20-21 dated 21.09.2020. Vide aforesaid NIT, bids were invited for supply of tank trucks for transportation of bulk petroleum products to different regions in Leh/Kargil and the valley. The contract is initially for a period of three years, however, with an option of extension for a further period of two years by the Indian Oil Corporation (for short ‘the Corporation’). 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners have been carrying on transportation of petroleum products of the Corporation since long. They are all small transporters owning single vehicle. With that they have been earning their livelihood. For all along, whenever tenders were issued by the Corporation, all the tank truck owners were allowed to participate. This is for the first time condition has been imposed to restrict bidding process to the bidders having minimum of three tank trucks in general category. As the petitioners are owning less than three tank trucks, they have been ousted from bidding process. 3. He further submitted that arbitrarily restriction has been imposed regarding the life of the vehicle as ten years whereas the Jammu and Kashmir Government has fixed the life of commercial vehicle as 15 years. 4. The petitioners were not given enough of time to enable them to form partnerships to be eligible to participate in the tendering process. As a result, their fundamental right to life has been violated as they have been ousted from business. At this stage, they will not be able to divert for the reason that all along they have been working with the Corporation for transportation of petroleum products. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, I do not find any reason to interfere in the present writ petition. 6. E-tender enquiry was issued by the Corporation for transportation of Petroleum products from Jammu to different locations in Leh/Kargil and the valley. Tender notice was issued on 21.09.2020 and the last date for submission of bids was 15.10.2020. There was a time gap of 25 days in between. 6. E-tender enquiry was issued by the Corporation for transportation of Petroleum products from Jammu to different locations in Leh/Kargil and the valley. Tender notice was issued on 21.09.2020 and the last date for submission of bids was 15.10.2020. There was a time gap of 25 days in between. The conditions in the tender notice against which the petitioners have the grievance are that the requirement now is that a bidder should have a minimum of three tank trucks owned by them and the age of truck as on the last date of the submission of the tender documents, should not be more than ten years. 7. I do not find any illegality in either of the two conditions imposed in the tender document. It is plain and simple contractual matter for transportation of petroleum products to the areas having difficult terrain and extreme weather conditions. The change is the way of life. We have seen many changes in Jammu & Kashmir also. If we continue sticking to old things we cannot progress in life. Merely because earlier the Corporation had been allowing the single truck owners to participate in the bidding process, does not mean that for all times to come, same conditions should continue. They have to deal with transportation of large quantity of petroleum products, which in the present tender are more than 50,000 Kilo Litres. Seeing the past experience, the changes in the tender document must have been made. It is the job of the employer to see which tender condition is better suited. The courts cannot super impose their wisdom in that. This in any case does not take away the right of bidders to earn their livelihood. It is not that they have been debarred from transporting the petroleum products or any other liquids in their vehicles. It is only that these conditions have been put in by the Corporation in the tender document in question. There was enough time for the petitioners to form partnership firms also, if they so wanted, as 25 days were there in between the issuance of tender notice and last date for submission of bids. Instead of having the mind set to comply with the conditions laid down in the tender document, the petitioners thought of challenging the same, by filing the present petition dated 13.10.2020, when the last date for submission of bids was close by. Instead of having the mind set to comply with the conditions laid down in the tender document, the petitioners thought of challenging the same, by filing the present petition dated 13.10.2020, when the last date for submission of bids was close by. It was listed in court on 15.10.2020, when the same was adjourned to 20.10.2020. Arguments were heard on that day. It was when the last date for submission of bids was already over. Idea at that stage can also be to spoil the game so that the matter remains pending and ad hoc arrangements are either required to be made or the earlier ones continue. 8. As far as the life of the vehicle is concerned, there is nothing wrong even in incorporating that condition in the tender document. A perusal of the condition in the tender document shows that as on the last date for submission of the tender documents, the life of the vehicle has been restricted to be up to ten years. The life of the contract is three years, which is extendable for a further period of two years. That would mean that when the overall work completes, the life of the vehicle will be 15 years. 9. Any employer, who is to award a contract, can always put conditions which are more stringent than the normal life of a vehicle, to ensure safe and timely transportation of the petroleum products. We all know that it is this time of the year only most of the petroleum products are to be transported to this difficult area and stored not only for requirement of the civilians but also for our defence forces. No compromise or delay in that process can be accepted. Putting any tendering process on hold in challenge to the conditions in the tender document on filmsy grounds, that too after the period for submission of bids has expired, would delay that process, which is not in larger interest of the nation. 10. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any merit in the present petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.