Abdul Russak Vs. Alappuzha Municipality - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- - 2. thereupon, the municipality, in its wisdom, proceeded to invite quotations from certain manufacturing companies directly, with a view to get the best products at a negotiated price. if the purchasing officer is satisfied that there is serious risk or inconvenience or loss to the public service by arranging to purchase by the open tender system or when the articles are urgently required, the procedure of limited tender system could be resorted to, however that, the purchasing officer must, in every such case, place on record the nature of the urgency and the reasons why a deviation from the general rule has been rendered necessary. under the aforesaid circumstances, the stand of the municipality that it was well within the authority to take recourse to the limited tender system in the interest of the municipality, cannot be held to be legally sound or permissible on the face of the provisions of the stores purchase manual. the commercial feasibility of such an arrangement could have been left well to the wisdom of the municipal authorities, had not the stores purchase manual been applicable to the municipality.thottathil b. radhakrishnan, j. 1. the petitioner is one among the persons, who had quoted on the invitation of tenders by the first respondent, municipality, for supply of certain electrical materials. none of the tenders were accepted.2. thereupon, the municipality, in its wisdom, proceeded to invite quotations from certain manufacturing companies directly, with a view to get the best products at a negotiated price.3. however, it is the admitted situation that even going by the division bench decision of this court, w.a.no. 1574 of 2004, the local self-government institutions are bound to follow the stores purchase manual prescribed by the state government. in terms of the stores purchase manual, tenders should be obtained by:(1) advertisement (open tender), (2) direct invitation to limited number of firms (limited tender) and (3) invitation to one firm only (single tender or private purchase).4. while the single tender systems is available as per clause 18 of the stores purchase manual, only for purchases which do not exceed rs. 250/- or if more than one kind of articles are ordered at one time, the total value of which does not exceed rs. 500/-, limited tender system, as per clauses 16 and 17, can be adopted only where the estimated value of the order to be given is less than rs. 20,000/-.5. in all cases, where there are sufficient reasons for holding that it is not in the public interest to call for tenders by advertisement, such course can be exclused. however, in all such cases, the purchasing officer must record such reasons and communicate them to the accountant general, confidentially, if necessary. if the purchasing officer is satisfied that there is serious risk or inconvenience or loss to the public service by arranging to purchase by the open tender system or when the articles are urgently required, the procedure of limited tender system could be resorted to, however that, the purchasing officer must, in every such case, place on record the nature of the urgency and the reasons why a deviation from the general rule has been rendered necessary.6. except for the situations provided in clauses 16, 17 and 18 and those noted in page no. 5 above, clause 15 provides for open tender system in all cases, where the estimated value, of the contract is rs. 20,000/- or above. the open tender system, which is the system of invitation to tender by public advertisement is required by clause 15 to be used as a general rule.7. the materials on record would disclose that the municipality took recourse to the open tender system and it was thereafter that it took recourse to the limited tender system. however, it is the admitted situation that there is no communication between the purchasing officer, municipality and the accountant general, as is required under clause 17. that apart, such a decision, choosing between the limited tender system and the open tender system, had not been made by the municipality, when it issued the first tender invitation notice by taking recourse to the open tender system. the nature of the contract for which tenders are invited is for supply of electrical goods and materials for a period of time and not for a definite quantity. so much so, the municipality can only resort to open tender system. under the aforesaid circumstances, the stand of the municipality that it was well within the authority to take recourse to the limited tender system in the interest of the municipality, cannot be held to be legally sound or permissible on the face of the provisions of the stores purchase manual.8. the learned counsel for the municipality points out that the municipality is willing to have a negotiation between the different companies from whom tenders have been invited and even with the person who has quoted on the basis of the earlier tender, to ensure that there is a further reduction, if possible, in the price factor. the commercial feasibility of such an arrangement could have been left well to the wisdom of the municipal authorities, had not the stores purchase manual been applicable to the municipality. however, that is not the case here. appendix xxx to the stores purchase manual makes it obligatory on the local bodies enlisted therein, including the first respondent herein, to act in terms of the said stores purchase manual only. it has been so held by the division bench of this court in w.a.no. 1574 of 2004.9. the learned counsel for the municipality, in the above context, submits that the municipality will advertise the invitation for fresh tenders. this is recorded and the writ petition stands disposed of directing that the work in question shall be re-tendered by the municipality. it is further clarified that this judgment decides only the legal issue as regards the applicability and effect of the stores purchase manual and does not, in any manner, confirm any of the views of the municipality against the petitioners, on facts, or any of the allegations of the petitioners, on facts, against the municipality.