Discrepancy between copies and orignal of the submitted bidding documents

Aumsuri,

You wrote ''For my case the copies seem to be copies of the orignal and they were 2 sealed in one envelope marked copy, while the orignal was sealed in other envelope marked original, It seems that the bidder wanted to bind the orignal document submitted together with the bidding document but he/she forgot to bind it together, because the orignal document contained only Instruction to bidders, bid data sheet general conditions of contract and specifications only; other information were not seen in the orignal document; But for the copies contained everything means original was misplaced somewhere; actual by considering Clause 25.6 of ITB which state that 'No bid will be rejected at bid opening except for late bids which will be returned unopened to the bidder pursuant to Clause 23' We decided to open copies if they also missed all information but because they carried important information we decide to read them and therefore record that it was read from copies so that the EC can note that during evaluation'' and RJM asked ''In your case at hand, the COPIES submitted are photocopies of the ORIGINAL or they marked COPIES but they are ORIGINAL?''

To me it is another confusion from Jacob because you did not answer for what asked by RJM at the end of his submission. You just tried to elaborate the outcomes of matter in question that copies contained everything means original was misplaced somewhere. So you mean if it was original misplaced somewhere what about the one submitted and missing some key information?, is it was substitution document? and if it was substitution it was wrong treated  under ITB Clause 24 of SBD for goods in this juncture to be received and opened at that time. Apparently to that Aumsuri you tried to preamble answers from the bidder submitted the original document missing some key information as you said, who said that the original was misplaced somewhere? and what circumstances led to [i]say bidder wanted to bind the original document submitted together with the bidding document but he/she forgot to bind it together?''. is it the bidder said during opening and that information recorded in the opening minutes? or this  assumptions from you?.

Another confusion I see from your last submission is that what type of this procurement? is it Goods, Works? and what other key information you are referring to that were missing during the read out? because I do know that you can not read each and every thing during the opening, you read only information required example from ITB Clause 24.3 of SBD for Large Work is Bidder's name, the bid prices, the total amount of each bid and of any alternative bid (if alternatives have been requested or permitted), any discounts, bid modifications, the presence or absence of bid security, bid securing declaration and such other details as the appropriate tender board may consider appropriate, will be announced by the secretary of the tender Board or his delegate at the opening''. Given to this provision in the SBD that means you may specify other detailed or information to be read out during opening in the bid data sheet, So Jacob are you referring the key information specified in this clause in your bidding document which were missing in the original documents? or which one?

In standard practice, during the opening session only information read out are normally from those procedural; form NO.9D issued by PPRA or from those specified above plus other added in Bid data sheet other information or submissions documents required should be considered during evaluation process and that if the original document was missing the so specified information/document the submission from  RJM will prevail.

RJM

For my case the copies seem to be copies of the orignal and they were 2 sealed in one envelope marked copy, while the orignal was sealed in other evelope marked original, It seems that the bidder wanted to bind the orignal document submitted together with the bidding document but he/she forgot to bind it together, because the orignal document contained only Instruction to bidders, bid data sheet general conditions of contract and specifications only; other information were not seen in the orignal docuemt; But for the copies contained everything means original was misplaced somewhere; actual by considering Clause 25.6 of ITB which state that 'No bid will be rejected at bid opening except for late bids which will be returned unopened to the bidder pursuant to Clause 23' We decided to open copies if they also missed all information but because they carried important information we decide to read them and therefore record that it was read from copies so that the EC can note that during evalaution

RSM

The descripancies was noted during the opening, when the orignal document opened it did not contain all required informations such as bid forms, boqs and other important informations as the matter of submission the Opening comitee chech on the copies and found all informations so even the read out was read in the copies and noted on the minutes of opening; So what is the way forward of this situation

Aumsuri,

Is there something fishy going on? How can a copy contain more information than the original? As a matter of procedure one need to check if copies are indeed copies of the original before proceeding with the evaluation process.

Ussually during the Evaluation of Bids the Evaluation Comittee uses copies which submitted by Bidders while Orignals are kept in a safe custody; After completion of the evaluation process the EC verify the Orignal Documents Vs Copies and it was found that the orignal documents misses alot of informations which if considered the bidder can be rejected. Now which is the right document to use in case of this descripances?