To ensure transparency in addressing any concerns of bidders, the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) has re-constituted Grievances Redressal Committee to redress the complaints of bidders pertaining to procurements/contracts being executed in the FBR (HQ).
According to an office order issued by the FBR here on Monday, in accordance with rule 48 (1) of the Public Procurement Rules, 2004, the competent authority has re-constituted the Grievances Redressal Committee comprising of the following officers of Federal Board of Revenue (HQ), Islamabad with immediate effect: Dr Taria Ghani, chief (Mat lR); Muhammad Khalid Jamil, (director Program Office) and Aftab Ahmed Razzaai, chief (TAGR).
The committee shall have full powers to redress the complaints of bidders pertaining to procurements/contracts being executed in the FBR (HQ) before the same take effect.
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) in a recent judgment on track and trace system of the FBR revealed that the FBR published an advertisement inviting applications for the grant of a five-year licence to be issued under the Sales Tax Rules, 2006 for the development, maintenance and operation of a track and trace system in accordance with the provisions of the said Rules and the Invitation of Licence (IFL) issued by the FBR.
Thirteen bidders submitted their bids for the award of the licence, five out of whom, were declared as "not responsive".
Vide office order dated 09.10.2019, the FBR constituted a three-member Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC), which empowered to address complaints of the bidders pertaining to the licencing under the Licencing Rules, 2019, and the 2004 Rules.
The NRTC, vide letter dated 22.10.2019 (stamped by the FBR as having been received on 23.10.2019), informed the GRC constituted by the FBR that it had "mistakenly written" Rs0.731 per 1,000 stamps, and that it had already clarified that its bid was actually Rs0.731 per one stamp, which made its bid Rs731 per 1,000 stamps.
The NRTC requested the GRC to accept the said clarification and declare its status as the lowest bidder in accordance with Rule 31 of the PPR.
The GRC, after obtaining an opinion from the Law and Justice Division (Law Division)
accepted NRTC's request for its financial bid to be treated as Rs731 per 1,000 stamps.
On 28.10.2019, the GRC also turned down reliance's grievance petition.
Vide letter dated 29.10.2019, the FBR informed NRTC that the board had been pleased to grant a licence to it at the price of Rs731 per 1,000 stamps for a period of five years to establish, maintain and operate the whole process of the track and trace system for tobacco products in Pakistan subject to the terms and
conditions in the Licencing Rules, 2019, IFL and other relevant laws.
A day after the issuance of the said letter, the instant writ petition was filed.
One of the petitioner companies informed the IHC that the GRC did not have the jurisdiction to permit a bidder to change its financial bid.
Only on the basis of the second opinion dated 28.10.2019 from the Law Division, the GRC, on 28.10.2019, accepted the NRTC's representation for the correction of its quoted price from Rs0.731 per 1,000 stamps to Rs731 per 1,000 stamps.
The Law Division's second opinion was reproduced in its entirety by the GRC in its decision dated 28.10.2019.
Paragraph 7 of the GRC's letter dated 28.10.2019 shows that it had relied solely on the Law Division's second opinion in making its decision.
All of this culminated in the issuance of the FBR's
letter dated 29.10.2019, whereby the NRTC was informed that the board was pleased to grant a licence to it at a price of Rs731 per 1,000 stamps for a period of five years to establish, maintain, and operate the whole process of the track and trace system for tobacco products in Pakistan subject to the terms and conditions as stipulated in the
Licencing Rules, 2019, the IFL and other relevant laws.
According to the IHC order, the court is of the view that given the manner in which the Dispute Resolution/Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC) accepted the NRTC's request to treat its financial bid to be Rs731/- per 1,000 stamps, rejected the NIFT's complaint against the grant of the licence to the NRTC, the remedy of going before the GRC could hardly be terms as adequate of efficacious.
The GRC's said decisions are solely based on the Law Division's second opinion dated 28.10.2019 and do not show any independent application of mind by the members of the GRC.
On 13.11.2019, the GRC turned down the NIFT's grievance petition against the grant of the licence to the NRTC solely on the basis of the second opinion dated 28.10.2019 of the Law Division's application of mind by the members of the GRC.
A remedy before such a forum cannot be considered as an effective alternative remedy for the purpose of denying relief to a petitioner under Article 199 of the Constitution.
"This court, while exercising equitable jurisdiction, cannot countenance the decision of the GRC to permit a bidder to correct errors in its financial bid after all the bids have been opened and the evaluation report has been issued. If modifications in financial bids are allowed after the results of the bidding were made known, frauds innumerable could be perpetrated against procuring agencies as well as other bidders, and our system of
competitive bidding would be placed in jeopardy and would lose stability. It would encourage slipshod bidding and would afford a pretext for unscrupulous bidders to prey on the public.
After bids have been opened, a bidder is bound by his error or mistake and is expected to bear the consequences of it, the IHC added.
Comments
Comments are closed.