<p>The High Court of Karnataka has said that the appellate authority shall henceforth endeavour to conclude the appeal pertaining to the tender matters within 90 days, if not in 30 days, as specified in the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements (KTPP) Act.</p>.<p>Noticing that the court is flooded with cases seeking direction to the authority, Justice M Nagaprasanna has said that if the appeal is kept pending it would be contrary to public interest and the authority shall record reasons in writing for not concluding the appeal within an outer limit of 90 days.</p>.<p>The petitioner Transasia Bio-Medicals Limited, a diagnostic company, had challenged the order passed by the appellate authority. The tender was invited by the Karnataka State Drug Logistics and Warehousing Society, under Department of Health and Family Welfare, for procurement of 1,201 semi automated biochemistry analyzer and 171 fully automated biochemistry analyzer. The procurement was for supply of these machines to diagnostic centres in government hospitals.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/state/top-karnataka-stories/bh-series-vehicle-registration-high-court-directs-govt-to-implement-amended-rules-1172469.html" target="_blank">BH series vehicle registration: High Court directs govt to implement amended rules</a></strong></p>.<p>The petitioner had alleged that the requirement in the industry is 200 tests per hour, however the tender notification had fixed 220 tests per hour, a norm that is not sought anywhere in the country. When the contract was awarded to another bidder on February 6, 2021, the petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority under the provisions of KTPP Act. The appeal was filed on February 25, 2021, and it was decided on November 9, 2022.</p>.<p>“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," the court said.</p>.<p>Insofar as the allegations of the petitioner, the court observed that there are no mala fides or acts contrary to law in the case at hand. Observing that the petitioner has been stonewalling the execution of the contract, the court dismissed the petition with a cost of Rs 25,000 on the petitioner.</p>
<p>The High Court of Karnataka has said that the appellate authority shall henceforth endeavour to conclude the appeal pertaining to the tender matters within 90 days, if not in 30 days, as specified in the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements (KTPP) Act.</p>.<p>Noticing that the court is flooded with cases seeking direction to the authority, Justice M Nagaprasanna has said that if the appeal is kept pending it would be contrary to public interest and the authority shall record reasons in writing for not concluding the appeal within an outer limit of 90 days.</p>.<p>The petitioner Transasia Bio-Medicals Limited, a diagnostic company, had challenged the order passed by the appellate authority. The tender was invited by the Karnataka State Drug Logistics and Warehousing Society, under Department of Health and Family Welfare, for procurement of 1,201 semi automated biochemistry analyzer and 171 fully automated biochemistry analyzer. The procurement was for supply of these machines to diagnostic centres in government hospitals.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/state/top-karnataka-stories/bh-series-vehicle-registration-high-court-directs-govt-to-implement-amended-rules-1172469.html" target="_blank">BH series vehicle registration: High Court directs govt to implement amended rules</a></strong></p>.<p>The petitioner had alleged that the requirement in the industry is 200 tests per hour, however the tender notification had fixed 220 tests per hour, a norm that is not sought anywhere in the country. When the contract was awarded to another bidder on February 6, 2021, the petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority under the provisions of KTPP Act. The appeal was filed on February 25, 2021, and it was decided on November 9, 2022.</p>.<p>“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," the court said.</p>.<p>Insofar as the allegations of the petitioner, the court observed that there are no mala fides or acts contrary to law in the case at hand. Observing that the petitioner has been stonewalling the execution of the contract, the court dismissed the petition with a cost of Rs 25,000 on the petitioner.</p>