The contract process of Jagdulla Hydropower Limited, a subsidiary of the state-owned Electricity Generation Company Limited (VUCL), has again come under controversy. The Patan High Court has issued a show cause order to the company in a writ filed against the re-invoked contract process of the 106 MW Jagdulla hydropower project to be constructed by the government in Dolpa.

The contract called for Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) by the company on June 20, 2081 under Civil and Hydramechanical was canceled on January 22, 2081 after the process got into dispute.

then invited the contract again on January 6. From the technical proposal evaluation, Jiangxi Construction Engineering (Group) Corporation (China) and ANK Construction Nepal JV and Sino Hydro Corporation were selected to open the financial proposal. Against that another applicant Siu Infrastructure and High Himalaya Hydro Construction JV filed a writ on Monday. 

The said JV has made Jagdulla Hydropower Company and the bid evaluation committee of the company an opponent. The JV claims that the disqualification of its company's technical proposal by the evaluation committee of Jagdulla Company is against Rule 61, 62 of the Public Procurement Rules, 2064. It is also mentioned in the writ petition that a complaint has been filed with the Authority Abuse Investigation Commission against Jiangxi and ANK JV among the two companies selected to open the financial proposal. 

The petitioner claims that the entire procurement process is unreasonable as the amount received from the bidder in the financial proposal is public information during the evaluation of the technical proposal. Therefore, an interim order was sought in the writ to cancel the notice issued for the evaluation of the technical proposal and to open the financial proposal based on that and to keep all the procurement process as it is. 

The single bench of High Court Judge Tank Prasad Gurung, while hearing the writ, ordered to show cause and bring it up for discussion. The court order also mentions that Jagdulla Company should submit a written reply within 15 days. 

Jiangxi and ANK JV and Sino Hydro Corporation were eligible, and Jagdulla Hydropower Company issued a notice to open financial proposals on April 9. According to the sources related to the company, it will be opened as the court has not said anything about stopping the financial proposal. The court has called for discussion on the next Baisakh 30. After that, we will do according to what he orders," said the source.

The petitioner claims that the amount received from the bidders in the financial proposal has also been breached during the evaluation of the technical proposal. In the process related to EPC-1's bid evaluation and examination, Section 32 (3), Section 34 and Rule 61 (3) of the Public Procurement Act were clearly flawed, and the entire procurement process was unjustified, so the entire process and decision of technical proposal evaluation and the opening of the financial proposal based on the same process and decision were canceled by the illegal notification of 2082 Baisah 09 published by the respondent public body for re-calling for bids. In the name of the agency, the mandate should be issued according to Article 144(1) (2) of the Constitution of Nepal," the writ petition states.

In Section 32 (subsection 3) of the Public Procurement Act, 2063, it is mentioned that the envelope of the financial proposal should be opened only after evaluating the technical proposal and in Section 34, only the financial proposal of the bidders who are qualified by the evaluation of the technical proposal should be opened as prescribed. In addition, rule 61(3) of the regulation states that no bidder or any other person who is not officially involved in the decision-making process shall be allowed to provide the information requested from the bidder or the information received, evaluation and comparison related to the examination of the bid, except as provided in the prevailing law or the regulation.

The petitioner also claims that the further process will cause irreparable damage to the petitioner as there is a direct legal error in the first sight as it is contrary to Section 32 (2) and 34 of the Act and Rule 61 (3) of the Public Procurement Regulations, 2064. According to section 32 of 2 (subsection 1) of the Act, the technical proposal should be opened first and the envelope of the financial proposal should be kept separately without opening it. In section 34, it is mentioned that only the financial proposal of the bidder who is qualified by the evaluation of the technical proposal should be opened as prescribed. 

Siu and High Himalaya JV have also requested an interim order in the name of the opponent to keep the process as it is without going ahead with the work related to bid evaluation, opening of financial proposal, bid acceptance and purchase agreement until the final decision of their case. 

Jagdullah's contract process has also been complained to Public Procurement Monitoring Office (PPMO), authority. An authority official confirmed that the complaint had been filed and said that he could not say anything immediately as it was under investigation. An official of PPMO said that the complaint was received in his office and that it was being studied. "It is our scope to see only the specified documents from the beginning to the closing of the company's contract, the evaluations of the technical and financial proposals made by the company are not within our jurisdiction," said the official. 

Jagdulla Company called for civil and hydromechanical contracts on May 20. Seven companies applied for the contract namely High Himalayan Hydro and AGE Company JV, Sharma and Zhongding International JV, Rail Development Corporation, Patel Engineering and Lama Construction JV, Ramechhap Sherpa Constructs and Soma Enterprises JV, Sino Hydro, Om Infra and Fewa Construction JV. But the Jagdulla company claimed that the contract was canceled on December 22 after none of the companies passed the technical proposal.

At that time, Energy Minister Deepak Khadka was accused of mediating the agreement by sidelining all the companies that applied and giving the contract to High Himalayan Hydro and AGE Company JV. The company that will get the contract of 16 billion has reached the authority about the transaction of giving 15/15 million to the other four companies at the rate of 1/1 percent and giving 2 percent to the minister. 

After that, the company called the contract process of the project again on January 6. According to the company, applications were made by Sino Hydro, Siu Infrastructure and High Himalaya Hydro Construction JV, Jiangxi Construction Engineering (Group) Corporation (China) and ANK Construction Nepal JV, Fewa Construction and Tumg Insat Medinclack JV. 

When the contract was called for the second time, Jagdulla Company also made some technical revisions. In the last 10 years, Jagdullah should have done at least 3 years worth of 34 million dollars in business, it is mentioned in the contract invitation notice. Experience in engineering, procurement and construction (EPC)/plant design in at least one contract worth more than $40 million, the notification said.