Public interest is best served when public money is not unnecessarily expended, the Delhi High Court has said while setting aside the AAP government's decision to cancel a private firm's bid in a tender for providing security to government schools here.
The high court did not agree with the Delhi government's decision to reject the firm's quote of Re 1 as agency charge as being unviable, saying, "An authority cannot supplant its views and has to go by the express terms and conditions of the tender document and it has to abide by the results of the tender."
A bench of Justices Badar Durrez Ahmed and Ashutosh Kumar noted in their judgement that this dispute was earlier too raised before the high court which in August 2016 had held that the bid of Re 1 was viable in view of the financial health of the firm and had asked the government to reconsider the matter.
Also Read
The government, thereafter, in November 2016 passed an order cancelling the tender and holding the bid of the firm, Orion Security, as unviable and unworkable. This was again challenged before the high court.
The firm in its petition had defended its low bid as being viable, saying it has a 'hybrid business model' under which funds received under various government-sponsored deployment- linked skill development programmes would be redirected for the work.
The court, while allowing the plea of the firm, said as per the notice inviting the tender, issued by the Directorate of Education, there was no condition which required a bidder to give any earlier instance of having successfully executed a contract on the suggested model for performing the work.
"Hence, any insistence on such explanation cannot be countenanced. A government agency has freedom of contract but the freedom cannot be stretched to a limit which is not relatable to the purpose and requirements of a tender which is brought out with specific conditions," it said.
The bench also rejected the government's claim that the decision was taken in public interest, saying, "As far as public interest in this matter is concerned, it would primarily be referable to the public money which would be expended for the purposes of the contract along with the safety of the persons for whom security is to be provided.
"Public interest is best served when public money is not unnecessarily expended.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
