Public Procurement Rules, 2008
Rules 4(12) and 54(6)
Tenders were found non-responsive–
Rules 4(12) and 54(6) of the PPR, minimum qualification requirement for the leading partner of the JVCA and other partners may be specified in the pre-qualification document, tender document or proposal document of the tender and, as such, the authority rightly inserted the condition of minimum experience in the Tender Data Sheet as per rules 4(12) and 54(6) of the PPR. Leave is granted to consider the following grounds:
(I) Because, the High Court Division overlooked that the tender which was the subject matter of Writ Petition No. 686 of 2018 has already been evaluated by the Committee and all the tenders were found non-responsive and accordingly, the authority cancelled the said tenders and issued a fresh tender notice/re-tender notice and so, there was/is no scope to pass work order on basis of the tender notice, which has already been cancelled and Western Company not being a participant in the fresh tender, is not entitled to get any work order upon satisfaction of the authority. So, the judgment and order of the High Court Division, is liable to be set aside;
II) Because, the High Court Division failed to consider the provisions of rules 4(12) and 54(6) of the Public Procurement Rules, 2008 and the facts that rule 54(6) of the PPR provides that minimum qualification requirement of the leading partner of the JVCA and other partners may be specified in the pre-qualification document, tender document or proposal document of the tender, the authority rightly inserted the condition. of minimum experience in the Tender Data Sheet following the aforesaid rules and, as such, the judgment and order of the High Court Division is liable to be set aside. …Roads & Highways Department (RHD), Dhaka =VS= Western Engineering (Pvt.) Ltd., (Civil), 2019 (2) [7 LM (AD) 191] ....View Full Judgment

Public Procurement Regulations, 2003
Read with
Public Procurement Rules, 2003
Regulations 6.1(d), 53
Re-tender– As purchase committee is the highest Authority which upon considering the above fact has decided to re-tender inasmuch as per regulation 53 of the said Rules it appears that the decision of the Review Penal appears to be beyond its jurisdiction.
The Central Committee of Government Purchase after examining the tender document found serious deviations of both the DCL SBA and EPI-BFEW for which any decision of Central Committee of Government Purchase will not prejudice for proceeding to re-tender of such project as the EPI-BFEW is also entitled to participate in the re-tender process. Moreover, the decision of the Review Panel is neither mandatory nor binding upon approving authority as per Public Procurement Rules, 2003. The approving Authority is fully empowered for directing to invite the tender as per regulations 6.1(d) of the Public Procurement processing and approval procedures.
The appeals are allowed without any order as to costs. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court Division making the Rules absolute are set aside. …Chittagong Water Supply and Sewerage Authority (CWASA) =VS= EPI-BFEW Consortium, (Civil), 2020 (1) [8 LM (AD) 303] ....View Full Judgment

Bangladesh Public Procurement Regulations, 2003
Regulations 53(6)(a) & (d)
Public Procurement Rules
Regulations 31(12)
Challenging the decision of the Cabinet Purchase Committee— The Review Panel exceeded its jurisdiction for rejecting the tender of DCL SBA who is not a complainant before the Review Panel under regulations 53(6)(a) nor under regulations 53((6)(d). The Review Panel cannot proceed for annulment in whole the tender of DCL SBA as the Review Panel have only power to suggest such annulment in whole or in part of the procuring entity. The procuring entity is not bound by such suggestion of the Review Panel under regulations 53(6)(d) of the Public Procurement Regulations, 2003 overriding the decision of Central Committee of Government Purchase. Ignoring such provisions of law the High Court Division came to the finding that the Review Panel canceled the tender of DCL SBA under regulations 53(6)(d) of the Public Procurement Regulation and rightly exercised in accordance with such regulations in cancelling the tender of DCL-SBA and also proceeded for further actions under regulations 31(12) of the Public Procurement Rules. The appeals are allowed without any order as to costs. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court Division making the Rules absolute are set aside. .....Chittagong WASA =VS= EPI-BFEW Consortium, (Civil), 2025(1) [18 LM (AD) 593] ....View Full Judgment