Hello,

Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

The Applicant hereby submit that in response to the proposal invited by Ahmedabad Vadodara Expressway Company Ltd (A wholly owned subsidiary of National Highways Authority of India) for empanelment of local fee Auditor from experienced and established firm of Chartered Accountants, our firm submitted its application alongwith 1) Technical proposal, 2) Financial proposal alongwith Rs. 10,000/- by way of Demand Draft dt. 15.07.09 tender fees before the fixed time.

It may be noted that on stipulated date applications submitted of an bidders were opened in front of applicants and /or their representatives and after applying evaluation criteria fixed up, a panel of three lowest quoting firms (L.1,L.2 and L.3) was selected and announced on the basis of “Least Cost Method” in which, our firm stood as L.2. It may be also noted that the panel found fees quoted by the firm selected as L-1 as ridiculously too low and therefore disqualified it from empanelment list of Auditors. Thus, our firm by virtue of this, became L-1 with fees quote and all criteria found acceptable. However, it was announced by Project Director/ Representative to call for fresh bid amidst the resistance registered by applicants present.

With the above factual backdrop, the applicant seeks following referred information u/s. 6(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 from you.

1]         Whether the subsidiary company viz. Ahmedabad Vododara Expressway Company Ltd. has informed the H.O. at New Delhi about the outcome of the result of the tender called for empanelment of local fees Auditor ?

2]         Whether the said subsidiary as announced in the meeting invited application a fresh for re-tender / If yes, then when and through which medium ?     

3]         If no, to the question raised under para-(2) then why ?

4]         Whether the work of local fee Auditor by the said Subsidiary Co. has been entrusted to the firm of Chartered Accountant ? If yes, then what procedure and policies and evaluation were applied in selecting the said firm as local fee Auditor ?

 5]         Whether the re-tender application was called for by the said Subsidiary Company form intending including applicants participated in the earlier tender said to be cancelled ?

 6]         Why under the bilateral decision of canceling tender by the Subsidiary Company, the huge amount collected by way of Tender Fees of Rs. 10,000/- be not refunded to the Applicants ?

 7]         If  re-tender applications are not invited then why our firm being selected as L-2 elevated to L1 on being announced disqualified of applicant selected as L-1, was not appointed for entrusting the audit work ?

 We would appreciate your information as regards to the above mentioned information sought from you.