Pretoria - The service provider contracted by the City to sell prepaid electricity has been interdicted from doing so, pending an application by two losing bidders for the contract to be set aside.
Cigicell and EasyPay initiated proceedings in the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, saying it had been awarded to an inexperienced company.
The case brought by Cigicell to set aside the contract will be heard on November 27.
The disputed tender was advertised in February and required potential bidders to be in possession of an electricity vending system or technology for selling prepaid electricity.
According to tender documents, the provision of the three-year contract was unrelated to the ill-fated smart prepaid electricity meter contract between the City and Peu Capital, declared illegal by the court last month.
The disgruntled companies argued that the preferred bidder, Roncon, didn’t meet the requirements despite scoring 75 points, which was higher than the other bidders.
“Before awarding the tender to any bidder, the City was required to determine whether that service provider had the requisite expertise and technology.
According to Roncon’s own version, “it had neither”, the applicants said in court papers.
Easypay and Cigicell alleged that Roncon didn’t have the requisite capacity and was also inexperienced in the field. Therefore, they wanted the contract to be set aside and allow the tendering process to be rerun.
“Out of 19 bids, only Roncon scored 75 points. Without further evaluation, the City decided to award the tender to Roncon. Thus, at the time this decision was made, no consideration was given to the requirements of expertise and technology,” they said.
In its ruling, the court said that should the tender be implemented, a bid to have it set aside “is likely to prove little more than a pyrrhic victory”.
“This is because if Roncon is given the green light to start providing services, it is likely to make the submission in Part B that even if the award of the tender were to be declared invalid, appropriate relief in the circumstances should not include an order setting aside its contract with the City,” the court said.
It also said EasyPay had the right to participate in the fresh tender process, likely to be run in the event the decision to award the tender to Roncon was reviewed and set aside.
The City withdrew its initial intention to oppose the application for an interdict brought by EasyPay and chose to abide by the court decision related to the disputed tender.
Surprisingly, Roncon agreed to the granting of an interim interdict instituted by Cigicell, but challenged an interdict by EasyPay.
“It is difficult to understand why Roncon would agree to the grant of interim relief in the Cigicell matter, but at the same time refuse to agree to the grant of similar relief in the Easypay case,” the court said.
In a filed affidavit, Roncon’s Tshifhiwa Ndouvhada said there was no need for the court to consider the urgent interdictory relief sought by Easypay.
He said Easypay ought to have joined the proceeding in the Cigicell matter, instead of launching its own application.
The court said the City appeared to have acted in contravention of Section 217 of the constitution, which stipulated that tendering process must be competitive and cost-effective.
Mayoral spokesperson Samkelo Mgobozi said he would not be in a position to comment until he had familiarised himself with allegations that the tender was awarded illegally to Roncon.