| Work Detail |
It was ordered to order the controversial purchaser to rectify irregularities within 15 days, and the State Commission will return Efel Travel 800 Euros paid for the appeal procedure, after the validity of this decision
The Commission for the Control of Public Procurement Procedure adopted the appeal of the Cetinje company Efel Travel and canceled the tender documentation of the Directorate for Inspection Affairs on 22 February this year, regarding the procurement of maintenance and servicing of official vehicles, the estimated value of 80,000 euros.
It was ordered to order the controversial purchaser to rectify the irregularities within 15 days, and the State Commission will return Efel Travel 800 Euros paid for the appeal procedure after the validity of this decision.
The Inspection Directorate, led by director Alija Košuta, will have to pay 605 euros to the legal representative of the appellant in the name of the costs of drawing up the appeal.
The Commission has undeniably established that the disputed tender documentation resulted in a significant violation of the law by specifying conditions and requirements regarding the technical characteristics or specifications of the public procurement in terms of equipment and work area of ??the service in Podgorica.
"From the above factual situation, it is clear that the contracting authority specifically demands that the service in Podgorica must have a covered, conserved work area of ??at least 600 square meters in one location or a minimum of 10 cranes of at least two tonnes of load capacity in one location, restricting the competition because it prevented the this public procurement procedure involves interested persons who have vehicle maintenance services in Podgorica to submit joint and hire subcontractors, as this can not meet this condition, "said the State Commission, signed by President Zoran Zivkovic.
It was also found that there was unclear tender documentation regarding maintenance of the vehicle in accordance with their factory warranties, in the services authorized for this purpose. It was also established that the tender documentation was unlawful because the contracting authority unjustifiably and incorrectly shortened the deadline for submission of bids, because by invitation to tender, it established the validity period of the bids 90 days after their opening, in order to provide in the form for the financial part of the offer, the deadline 60 days.
|
