KARACHI, Nov 15: The Sindh High Court dismissed a constitutional petition filed by Petrosin Engineers and Contractors Private, Singapore, against the Federation of Pakistan, the Pakistan Petroleum Ltd and the successful bidder, the consortium of Descon Engineering Limited and Presson Manufacturing Ltd.

The bench consisted of Chief Justice Saiyed Saeed Ashhad and Justice Ghulam Rabbani.

In its judgment the SHC not only dismissed the petition in limine but also dismissed the injunction application holding that the said matter could not be agitated in the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.

The petitioner, Petrosin, had contended that the award of the EPCC Contract (Engineering Procurement Construction and Commissioning Contract) for the Mazarani Gas Field Project had been unlawfully awarded to a higher bidder, whereas it had given the lowest bid price.

During the course of the arguments, it had been contended by the petitioner’s counsel that since the Minister of Commerce, A. Razzaq Dawood, was a director on the Board of Descon Engineering Ltd, the PPL had, in violation of the bid documents and generally accepted principles regarding awarding of contracts, unlawfully awarded the EPCC Contract to the consortium of Presson and Descon, despite Petrosin’s bid being the lowest.

Barrister Sajid Zahid appeared on behalf of the Pakistan Petroleum. During the course of arguments, he had contended that the EPCC Contract was awarded by the PPL after following a completely transparent procedure and after a thorough evaluation at several different levels by the concerned Authority and the management of the Pakistan Petroleum Ltd.

The PPL’s counsel further contended that the petitioner’s bid, despite being the lowest, could not be accepted as Petrosin had concealed certain material information and had made certain misstatements in the bid documents.

Despite being given full opportunity to participate and develop its bid the petitioner had failed to remedy the shortcomings in its bid and eventually it was evaluated to be technically deficient.

The High Court held that making of a bid was tantamount to making an offer only, and in the instant case the fact that the petitioner’s bid was found to be technically deficient did not entitle it to the award of the contract. Based on the said position, the High Court held that no vested right had accrued to the petitioner simply by making a bid (even if it was the lowest bid) and there was no question of its having a legitimate expectancy of being awarded the contract.

The PPL was represented by Barristers Sajid Zahid and Taha Alizai, and the petitioners by Barristers Chaudhry Mohammed Jamil and Zahid Jamil.