Authority: Calcutta High Court

Order Date: 10 November 2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioners: M/s Neogi Construction & Co. & Anr.
  • Respondents: The State of West Bengal & Ors., including the Chief Medical Officer of Health, Nadia (respondent No. 4).
  • The dispute arose from an e‑tender notice dated 11 September 2026. Neogi Construction submitted its bid along with a bank solvency certificate issued by the Branch Manager of Union Bank of India, Krishnanagar Branch, which did not bear a date.
  • The State authorities disqualified the petitioner on 3 November 2026, citing the undated certificate and relying on Clause 16.3 of the tender document.
  • Petitioners contended that Clause 19.2 of the tender document obliges the evaluating committee to grant an opportunity to submit a dated solvency certificate before rejecting the bid.
  • Respondents argued that Clause 16.3 permitted summary rejection when a required document was deficient or not submitted.

Court Reasoning

  • The Court quoted Clause 19.2: “During evaluation the Committee may summon bidders and seek clarification/information or additional documents or original hard copies of documents submitted online. If these are not produced within specified time, the bid proposals will be liable for rejection.”
  • The Court observed that Clause 16.3 does not apply because the petitioner had indeed submitted the solvency certificate; the only deficiency was the absence of a date.
  • Accordingly, the Committee was required, under Clause 19.2, to provide the petitioner an opportunity to furnish a dated certificate before deciding on qualification.

Final Outcome

  • The petitioner is permitted to submit a duly dated bank solvency certificate before the Chief Medical Officer of Health, Nadia (respondent No. 4) by 12 November 2026.
  • If the certificate is submitted within this time‑frame, respondent No. 4 shall decide, in accordance with law, whether the petitioner qualifies as a bidder.
  • If the petitioner fails to submit the corrected certificate by the stipulated date, the disqualification memo dated 3 November 2026 shall be revived and the petitioner will remain disqualified.
  • The writ petition is hereby disposed of.

Topics: Public Procurement, Legal Dispute