PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa on Monday set aside the decision of Directorate of Health Services rejecting the technical bid of Mahalsa Services (Antique Mardol), Verna for tender for environmental support services (up-keeping) and operations and maintenance at various hospitals, health centres and offices of health institutions across the State.
The Court directed the Directorate of Health Services to consider re-examining technical bids of the petitioner Mahalsa Services, and if it qualifies criteria then to consider its financial bids along with two others expeditiously.
The technical bid was rejected on the grounds that the petitioner does not allegedly fulfil qualifying criteria of Rs 10 crore single work order in seven years. The Court accepted the contention of the petitioner that the department should consider the work order of Rs 7.50 crore issued in 2017 and its extension in 2020 for Rs 7.97 crore as one order.
Incidentally, Mahalsa Services had offered a bid of Rs 47.03 crore as against the Rs 93.7 crore and Rs 104.81 crore offered by two other bidders, whose financial bids were opened by the directorate of health services.
Arguing on behalf of the petitioner, senior Adv A F Diniz contended that the petitioner fulfilled the qualifying criteria and therefore rejection of the petitioner’s technical bid was vitiated by patent arbitrariness and perversity. He produced details of works awarded to the petitioner in October 2017 for a period of three years and which was further extended for another three years. He submitted that the work order, together with extension, constituted a single work of the value of greater than Rs 10 crore as specified in the qualifying criteria in the tender issued in September 2023.
Government Adv Manoish Salkar told the court that the petitioner had no right to cumulatively assess the value of work in the two work orders and based on its claim that he fulfilled qualifying criteria of having minimum Rs 10 crore of single work order in the State. He said that technical evaluation committee was justified in rejecting the petitioners technical bids.
However, the division bench comprising Justices Mahesh Sonak and B P Deshpande ruled, “Petitioner is ultimately adjudged as fulfilling qualifying criteria, then his financial bid must be considered along with the financial bids submitted by two other respondents — Vijay Facility Management Pvt Ltd and Ecoclean Systems and Solutions Goa.
