CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging internal instructions issued by the Works department to prevent cartelisation and bid-rigging in government tenders.
A division bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Chittaranjan Dash, in its September 30 judgment, also imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on the petitioner, observing his conduct apparently had a ‘latent intent to promote cartelisation’. The web copy of the judgment was uploaded on Tuesday.
The petitioner had challenged an internal communication dated August 5, between the FA-cum-special secretary, Works department and engineer-in-chief (civil)-cum-roads, as well as a follow-up letter dated August 19 issued by the engineer-in-chief’s office to chief construction engineers of different circles.
The communications directed tender-inviting authorities to ensure genuine competition, prevent cartelisation and bid-rigging, scrutinise tenders in detail and avoid mechanical acceptance of bids. They also provided for administrative action, reporting serious cases, fixing responsibility, maintaining records, reviewing ongoing tenders and sensitising field officers. The petitioner contended that the instructions encroached upon the statutory powers of the Competition Commission of India (CCI) under the Competition Act, 2002.
Rejecting the contention, the bench said internal communications between the officials were merely executive. The bench however, observed, “Such communication is intended to ensure and/or streamline the functioning and workability within the department.” It found no indication that the Works department had sought to usurp the CCI’s powers. Instead, the instructions contemplated administrative action where evidence of cartel formation was found and reporting such cases to the CCI, the court said.
The bench said the directions were ‘in conformity with the provisions contained under Section 26’ of the Competition Act and intended to activate, rather than override, the statutory mechanism.
Significantly, the bench said challenging such an ‘innocuous letter’ was ‘inconceivable’ when its objective was to ensure fair competition and prevent cartelisation in open tenders.
“The conduct of the Petitioner gives us an impression that he sought to get away from the aforesaid letters, obviously with the latent intent to promote cartelization,” the court observed. Finding no ground for interference, the bench dismissed the petition with Rs 50,000 costs, directing the amount to be deposited with the State Legal Services Authority within two weeks. The amount will be earmarked for the welfare of juveniles.
