Aastha Thakur
Published on: 20 December 2022 at 14:28 IST
According to the High Court of Karnataka, the appellate body will now make every effort to resolve any appeals involving bid matters within 90 days, if not within 30 days, as prescribed under the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements (KTPP) Act.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna, observed that the court is already facing backlogged cases seeking direction from the authority. The court believes that continuing the appeal suit is not in the best interests of the public, and the authority has set a 90-day deadline for recording reasons for not concluding.
The petitioner, Transasia Bio-Medicals Limited, challenged the decision given by the appellate authority. The tender was organised by the Karnataka State Drug Logistics and Warehousing Society under the Department of Health and Family Welfare to sanction the supply of these machines to diagnostic centres in government hospitals.
The petitioner raises the issue of a requirement in the industry that is 200 tests per hour; however, the tender notification fixed 220 tests per hour, a norm that is not sought anywhere in the country.
The petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority under the provisions of the KTPP Act. The appeal was filed on February 25, 2021, and it was decided on November 9, 2022.
The court was of the opinion that “There can be no justification whatsoever to keep the appeal pending for 630 days as against 30 days. The appellate authority appears to be swayed by the statute depicting disposal of the appeal in 30 days to be as far as possible.”
“The words ‘as far as possible’ cannot be taken as ‘so far as possible’, so as to defeat the object of the statute qua limitation. Such appeals filed within the time frame under Section 16(1) of the Act shall be decided under Section 16(3) of the Act, within 90 days from its filing,”
sofar As for the allegations of the petitioner, the court found no such malfeasance or acts contrary to law in the present matter.The court stated that the petitioner is just trying to cause hindrance in the execution of the contract.
Hence, the court dismissed the petition at a cost of Rs 25,000 to the petitioner.