KARACHI: The Sindh High Court on Tuesday set aside a contract awarded for organising the International Defence Exhibition and Seminar (IDEAS) 2020 and ruled that the authorities concerned may initiate a fresh tendering process in accordance with relevant laws.

A two-judge SHC bench comprising Justices Mohammad Ali Mazhar and Agha Faisal ruled that the process culminating in the award of the contract by the Defence Export Promotion Organisation (DEPO) to the Badar Expo Solutions (event manager) was without recourse to a competitive bidding process as envisaged under the law.

The bench said the ministry of defence production and DEPO may initiate a de novo tendering process for IDEAS-2020 and any such future events in due conformity with the Public Procurement Regulatory Ordinance (PPRO), 2002 and Public Procurement Rules (PPR), 2004.

Orders authorities to start a fresh tendering process as per rules

The directives came on a petition moved by Humera Imran of Events Solutions through senior counsel Mian Raza Rabbani through which she challenged the contracts of IDEAS 2016, 2018 and 2020 on the ground that the process and consequential award of the contract was incongruous with the mandatory requirements of the PPRO and PPR.

The petitioner impleaded the ministry of defence production, DEPO, Badar Expo Solutions and Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA) as respondents.

Referring to a question whether the contract was exempted from the operation of ordinance and rules by virtue of national security, the bench observed that the counsel for Badar Expo Solutions remained unable to generalise any ground to maintain that the award of the contract came within the domain of national security.

It maintained that the contract in question was not exempted from the operation of the PPRO and PPR by virtue of the national security exception contained in Rule 14(a), adding that during arguments a lawyer for one of the respondents stated that the provision of Rule 42-b (request for quotations) and 42-c (direct contracting) were applicable in the present facts and circumstances.

However, the judges said, after perusal of the relevant provisions and a Lahore High Court judgement, they were of the opinion that the contract could not have been negotiated directly and/or by a private treaty within the confines of Rule 42.

“It has been determined supra that the Ordinance and the Rules were squarely applicable to the exercise of the award of the contract. It has further been determined that the award under scrutiny was undertaken in prima facie breach of the rules, hence, we are of the view that the process and award of the contract amounted to mis-procurement,” the order said.

Referring to a judgement of the Supreme Court, the bench observed that the right to choose in the context of awarding contracts could not be considered to be an arbitrary power and if the said power was exercised for any collateral purpose then the same merited being struck down.

Earlier, Mr Rabbani argued that the contract in question was awarded unilaterally without issuing any tender and a competitive bidding process as required under the law, adding that the previous contracts were awarded in compliance with the provisions of relevant laws.

The counsel for the private respondent, Mir Mohammad Ali Talpur, argued that the petition was not maintainable on the ground that the antecedents of the petitioner or persons associated wherewith were alleged to be impeachable.

He also argued that IDEAS was a matter of national security.

Deputy Attorney General Liaquat Shaikh adopted the arguments advanced by Advocate Talpur and read out the constituents of the comments filed by the respondents.

Sindh govt told to approach relevant forum

In response to a letter of the provincial government about holding a judicial inquiry into the murder of Jeay Sindh Tehreek’s leader Irshad Ranjhani in Malir district, the SHC on Tuesday said that the provincial authorities may approach a proper forum for the judicial probe.

While responding to the letter, the SHC said that the district and sessions court concerned may be approached since it was the domain of district judges to hold a judicial inquiry or appoint any other judicial officer for this purpose.

There was a 2005 judgement of the SHC regarding judicial inquiries, they added.

Published in Dawn, February 13th, 2019