2-A-wp7203.24.odt 1/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO. 7203 OF 2024 M/s.V.L.Electrical Works and others -Vs.- Zilla Parishad Gondia and another ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders. or directions and Registrar's orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A.S.Deshpande, Adv. for the petitioners. Mr. A.Y.Kapgate, Adv.for the respondents CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ. DATE : 24TH FEBRUARY, 2025 Heard Shri Deshpande, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Kapgate, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The petition questions the rejection of the offer of the petitioners, tendered in respect of the NIT dated 21/09/2024 for constituting a panel of contractors for electrical works in 327 locations. 3. Mr.Deshpande, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the condition of Geo-tagging is not an essential condition, apart from the fact, that the petitioners have been discriminated, as other persons, who are not eligible have been considered. 4. The above contention is opposed by Mr.Kapgate learned counsel for the respondents, contending that the KHUNTE 2025:BHC-NAG:1813-DB 2-A-wp7203.24.odt 2/3 petitioners have failed to submit the Geo-tagging photographs, to indicate compliance, which is the term in the NIT in that regard, which according to them was essential. 5. To consider the above controversy, it is necessary to consider the language of the relevant term No.31 (Pg.61) of the NIT, which runs as under: ^^31- fufonsrhy izlrkfor dkekaps izR;{k LFkG HksV vgoky da=kVnkjkus Lok{kjhlghr] ftih,l yksds’kulg fufonsrhy rkaf=d fyQkQk e/;s yko.ks vko’;d vkgs- dkekaph ;knh Lora=fjR;k fufonsyk tksM.;kar vkysyh vkgs-** 6. A perusal of the above language, would indicate, that the term in the NIT for submitting the photographs with GPS location was an essential term, as it indicated, that the tenderer had visited each and every site and accordingly had the knowledge of the location and the situation at every site in terms of which, he was expected to submit an overall bid, for the purpose of offering his services for electrification of the water works to be carried out at those sites. It would, therefore, not be proper to contend, that the clause in the NIT, regarding submitting Geo-tag photographs was a non-essential condition. 7. A perusal of the sheet prepared by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 (Pg.100) indicates, that at Sr.Nos.1 to 6 and 8 (including petitioners herein), admittedly, according to the chart, had not submitted the complete set of Geo-tag photographs. It is also necessary to note, that all the KHUNTE 2-A-wp7203.24.odt 3/3 tenderers at Sr.Nos.1 to 12 were held to be ineligible. It is also an admitted position that all the tenderers, were granted a day’s time, to rectify the defects, by the end of 05/10/2024, by which time, all except the petitioners, are claimed to have submitted the Geo-tag photographs in respect of all the 327 sites. The petitioners as are the admitted position did not do so as indicated by Mr.Deshpande, learned counsel for the petitioners, upon a query being made by the Court. If that be so, and since we have already held that the condition in the NIT of submitting Geo-tag photograph is an essential condition, non-compliance thereof would indicate that the bids of the petitioners have rightly not been considered. We therefore do not see any ground made out to interfere in the instant petition at the behest of the petitioners on account of the fact, that it has been held to be ineligible on account of non- submission of Geo-tag photographs in respect of all the 327 sites. The petition is therefore dismissed. No order as to costs. (ABHAY J. MANTRI,J) (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J) KHUNTE