Over the last nearly 8 months as Sr.DFM, I have come across some strange special conditions in the tender schedules which pose a problem in finalizing tenders. More often, such conditions lead to discharge of tenders. These conditions are often related to payment terms or payment schdules and sometimes restrict the element of free competition.
I shall just give one example on the ballast test report. A condition in the tender schedule says that the test report should be from X, Y or Z institutions (4 to 5 of them) which are mostly located in Bilaspur and the eastern part of the country. A bidder submitted a report from a state govt. PWD laboratory which was not in the list of institutions mentioned in the tender schedule. Should he be considered? But I must also add that there was no condition which said that the report from only these institutions would be considered. So should the list of institutions where the ballast test is to be conducted be treated as illustrative or restrictive? Fortunately the bidder was ineligible on other grounds and he was not considered but what if he was the lowest eligible bidder?
We are also faced with a judgement of the High Court of Chhatisgarh which says that the conditions mentioned in the tender schedule are supreme and should be followed scrupulously.
So should we propose for re-starting the vetting of tender schedules? Or should we ask the executives design model tender schedules for all types of works and send them to finance for vetting so that there is some standardization?
Opinions please.
R.Ananth
Sr.DFM/BSP
I shall just give one example on the ballast test report. A condition in the tender schedule says that the test report should be from X, Y or Z institutions (4 to 5 of them) which are mostly located in Bilaspur and the eastern part of the country. A bidder submitted a report from a state govt. PWD laboratory which was not in the list of institutions mentioned in the tender schedule. Should he be considered? But I must also add that there was no condition which said that the report from only these institutions would be considered. So should the list of institutions where the ballast test is to be conducted be treated as illustrative or restrictive? Fortunately the bidder was ineligible on other grounds and he was not considered but what if he was the lowest eligible bidder?
We are also faced with a judgement of the High Court of Chhatisgarh which says that the conditions mentioned in the tender schedule are supreme and should be followed scrupulously.
So should we propose for re-starting the vetting of tender schedules? Or should we ask the executives design model tender schedules for all types of works and send them to finance for vetting so that there is some standardization?
Opinions please.
R.Ananth
Sr.DFM/BSP
