Regulations 31(12)
|
It appears that in view of the decision of the Review Panel and the
regulation 31(12) of Public Procurement Rules there is no scope to accept
the bid in compliance with any direction to execute contract in the matter
with the respondents as directed by the High Court Division. The impugned
Judgment and Order by the High Court Division making the Rules absolute are
set-aside.
Chittagong Water Supply & Sewerage Authority (CWASA) vs EPI-BFEW Consortium
16 BLC (AD) 9.
|
Chittagong Water Supply & Sewerage Authority (CWASA) vs EPI-BFEW Consortium |
16 BLC (AD) 9 |
Re-tender–
|
Public Procurement Regulations r/w
Public Procurement Rules, 2003
Regulations 6.1(d), 53
Re-tender– As purchase committee is the highest Authority which upon
considering the above fact has decided to re-tender inasmuch as per
regulation 53 of the said Rules it appears that the decision of the Review
Penal appears to be beyond its jurisdiction.
The Central Committee of Government Purchase after examining the tender
document found serious deviations of both the DCL SBA and EPI-BFEW for
which any decision of Central Committee of Government Purchase will not
prejudice for proceeding to re-tender of such project as the EPI-BFEW is
also entitled to participate in the re-tender process. Moreover, the
decision of the Review Panel is neither mandatory nor binding upon
approving authority as per Public Procurement Rules, 2003. The approving
Authority is fully empowered for directing to invite the tender as per
regulations 6.1(d) of the Public Procurement processing and approval
procedures.
The appeals are allowed without any order as to costs. The impugned
judgment and order passed by the High Court Division making the Rules
absolute are set aside. …Chittagong Water Supply and Sewerage Authority
(CWASA) =VS= EPI-BFEW Consortium, (Civil), 2020 (1) [8 LM (AD) 303]
....View Full Judgment
|
Chittagong Water Supply and Sewerage Authority (CWASA) =VS= EPI-BFEW Consortium |
8 LM (AD) 303 |