minutesofthemeetingheldonii.o5.2oisatnoonand i't' and …

t.1

PUNJAB PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION' I.AHORE'

MINUTESoFTHEMEETINGHELDoNII.o5.2oISATNoonAND17.05-2018 AT O2:OO P.r,r.}ON PROCUREMENT OF I'T' HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE

IiEMIiHROIGH TEN;;{dNDLi iPRA RULES-2014 FORTHE YEAR 2017'18'

This case relates to Procurement of I.T. Hardware and software Items as

per details given below:-

Sr.No

LotNo.

Name of Hardware Items Brand Quantity tobe purchased

1 1 Interviews on Video Lin( Point-Point VC Equipment for HuddleRooms

Polycom, Cisco,Huawei or equivalent

6

2 2 Bandwidth Infrastructure (VPN

Connectivity for LHR, MUL, RWP)

3

3 3 55" LED Smart W TCL, Orient, Samsungor equivalent

6

4 4 PC(17) Dell, Lenovo, HP orequivalent

t2

5 5Medium Duty Printer

HP, Canon, orequivalent

5

6 6 CCTV HDD 8 TB Western Digital,Seagate or equivalent

10

7 7 Label Printer Zebra, Toshiba,Brother or equivalent

16

B IBar Code Reader

Zebra, DataLogigMotorola or equivalent 16

9 9Bio Metric Attendance Devices

ZKS, ZKTeco, Dlgitusor equivalent 15

10 10Production Printer (with Finisher) HP, Cannon, or

equivalent1

11 11 UPS 5 KVAAPC, Crown, Santak orequivalent 2

t2 L2 Heavy Duty ScannerHP, Canon, orequivalent 2

1313 rcR/oMvocR/

Barcode Reading Software

ABBAY, Remark,Office or equivalent 01

t4 L4 MalwareBytes Endpoint Security03

15 AVG Internet Security File Server 03

16AVG Internet Security BusinessEdition 02

Contd...P/2

From Pre-page:

PROCUREMENT OF I.T. HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE ITEMS THROUGH ''\-,rEr{D=* UNDER rr*^ Rr.Er-201*,roR rr= yrAi 2;1t_ir.-2. Keeping in view, before procuring, a bid proposar frender was preparedfor the above mentioned items. The bid proposaflrender was ascertained thoroughlywith the Co-operation assistance/guidance of Punjab Information Technology Board(PITB) Department for procurement. The method of adveftisement/tender was adoptedunder Rule-12 of the Punjab procurement Regulatory Authority (Rules zot4)reproduced below:-

L2. Method of Advertisement.

(1). Subject to rule 59, a procuring agency shall advertiseprocurement of more than one hundred thousand rupees and up tothe limit of two million rupees on the website of the Authority inthe manner and format specified by regulations but if deemed inpublic interest, the procuring agency may also advertise theprocurement in at least one national daily newspaper.(2) Subject to rule 13, any procurement exceeding two millionrupees shall be advertised on the website of the Authority, thewebsite of the procuring agency, if any, and in at least two nationaldaily newspapers of wide circulation, one in English and one inUrdu.(3) A procuring agency shall ensure that the information posted

on the website is complete for purposes for which it has beenposted, and such information shall remain available on that websiteuntil the closing date for the submission of bids.

3. Accordingly, the Tender Notice for Procurement of I.T. Hardware and

Software Items was published in the two national daily newspapers and uploaded at

websites of PPRA & PPSC on 24-A4-2018 with the closing date i.e, 11-05-2018 at 12.00

Noon.

4. A Meeting was held on 11-05-2018 at 12:00 Noon for opening of the

Tender for Procurement of I.T. Hardware and Softrrrrare Items for Technical Evaluation

of all the venders. All venders were re-called on 17-05-2018 for opening of Financial

Bids.

The following pafticipated:-

1. Rao Afzal Mohsin, ConvenerDirector. I.T.

2. Mr. Muhammad Farooq Raja MemberDirector Rectt.-I

3. Mr. Muhammad Sultan MemberDirector PPSC

4. Mr. Muhammad Naeem Memberflechnical OfflcerSystem Analyst, PPSC

5. Mr. Rashid Mahmood MemberAccounts Officer

5. Mr. Rizwan Siddiue Technical OfficerNetwork System Engineer, PPSC

7. Co-opted Member, PITB Technical OfficerContd...P/3

-2- I

-3-

From Pre-page:

PROCUREMENT OF I.T. HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE ITEMS THROUGHTENDER UNDER, A NIILES.2O14 FOR THE YEAR 7-7n_

5. The Director I.T., PPSC (Convener) briefed the participants. The bids in

single stage two envelop system (Technical and Financial Bids separately) were

received against each lot. The Procurement flechnical & Evaluation Committee

examined all the bids as per the eligibility criteria provided in the bidding documents,

arithmetical checked and verified the documents and bid security submitted by the

bidders. The Technical & Financial Evaluation Statements prepared in each lot as

under:-

LOT NO.1(Interview on Video Link. Point'Point VC Eouipment for Huddle Rooms)

(06 No.)

6. In response to the Tender/Advertisement, 02 bids were received from the

Firms. As per budget provision, the Procurement Committee decided to enhance the

quantity of items from 0.6-NgrlggZNgs, as per lowest in price given by vender. After

thorough evaluation of the Technical / Financial bids/rates quoted by venders, the

Financial Evaluation Committee prepared the comparison statement as under:'

Comparison Statement

LOT NO.2Bandwidth Infrastructu re

(VPN Connectivitu for LHR, MUL, RWP. (03 No.)

7. In response to the Tender/Advertisement,0l bid was received from the

following Firm. After thorough evaluation of the Technical / Financial bids/rates quoted

by venders, the Financial Evaluation Committee prepared the comparison statement is

as under:-

Comoarison Statement

sR.NO.

VENDERS TECHNICAL/ TENDER

ELIGIBILTY

Unit Pricewithout GST.

FINANCIAT EVALUATIONREMARKS

1 Meqa Plus No2. Mansha Brothers Yes Rs.2,L3$541- Bid accepted being lowest

in orice

sR.NO.


ELIGIBILTY

Unit Price without GST. FINANCIALEVALUATION

REMARKSMRC OTC (withalternate

backup link)1 Wateen (h^) Ltd. Yes Rs.90,000/- Rs.4r501000/- Bid accepted

being lowestin price

Contd..,P/4

A

4-'LOT NO.3 (s5" LED Smart Tv) (06 Nos.) y


Firms. As per budget provision, the Procurement Committee decided to enhance thequantity of items from 06 No. to 07 Nos. as per lowest in price given by vender. Afterthorough evaluation of the Technical / Financial bids/rates quoted by venders, theFinancial Evaluation committee prepared the comparison statement as under:-

Comparison S-tatement

LoT NO.4 (PC 17) (12 Nos.)

9' In response to the Tender/Advertisement, 04 bids were received from the


quantity of items from 12 No. to 14 Nos. as per lowest in price given by vender. After


Financial Evaluation Committee prepared the comparison statement as under:-


LOT NO.5 (Medium Dutv Printer) (O5 Nos.)


following Firms. After thorough evaluation of the Technical / Financial bids/rates quoted

by venders, the Financial Evaluation Committee prepared the comparison statement is

as under:-


sR,NO.


ELIGIBILTY


FII{AI{CIAL EVALUATIONREMARKS

1 Mansha Brothers Yes Rs.80,500/- Bid Rejected beingHighest in price

2 Marjan International Yes Rs.89,000/- Bid Rejected beingHighest in price

3. Fatmilmpex Yes Rs.71,800/- Bid accepted being lowestin price

sR.NO.


ELIGIBILTY

Unit Pricewithout GST

FINANCIAT EVALUATIONREMARKS

1 Global Enterprises Yes Rs.11041689/- Bid Rejected beingHiohest ln orice

2. Octo-3, TechnologiesPakistan

Yes Rs.1,03r915/- Bid Rejected beingHighest in price

3 Fatmilmpex Yes Rs.91,353/- Bid Rejected beingHiohest in orice

4 Generation System Yes Rs.90,850/- Bid accepted being lowestin price

sR.NO.

VENDER,S TECHNICAL/ TENDER

ELIGIBILTY


FINANCIAL EVALUATIONREMARKS

1, Global Enterprises No Both Bids rcjected onTechnical Grcund2. Octo-3, Technologies

Pakistan

No

3 Generation Systems Yes Rs.29,908/- Bid accepted being lowestin orice

Contd...P/5

\ /ar-5-

LOT ilO.6 (CCTV HDD 8 TB (10 Nos.)



quantity of items from 1O No. to 12 Nos. as per lowest in price given by vender. After


Financial Evaluation Committee prepared the comparison statement as under:-


LOT NO.7 (Label Printer (16 Nos')

12. In response to the Tender/Adveftisement, 03 bids were received from the

following Firms. After thorough evaluation of the Technical / Financial bids/rates quoted

by venders, the Financial Evaluation committee prepared the comparison statement is

as under:-

ComParison Statement

LOT NO'8 (Bar Code Rader) (15 Nos'r

13.InresponsetotheTender/Advertisement,03bidswerereceivedfromthe

following Firm. After thorough evaluation of the Technical / Financial bids/rates quoted

by vender, the Financial Evaluation committee prepared the comparison statement is as

under:-


sR.NO.

TECHNICAL/ TENDER

EUGIBILTY


RNANCIAL EVALUATIONREMARKS

1 Octo-3 Technologies

Pakistan

Yes Rs.311293/' Bid Rejected beingHighest in Price

2. Global Enterprises Yes Rs.44,350/' Bid Rejected beingHiohest in Price

3. Fatmilmpex Yes Rs.301453/ Bid accepted being lowestin prce-

sR.NO.


ELIGIBILEI

Unit Priccwithout GST.

FITTANCIAL EVALUATIONREtIARKS

1 MMB SoluUons No All three bids wererejected on Technical

Ground2. Global No

3. Fatmilmpex No

SR,NO.

VENDERS TECHNICAT/ TENDER

ELIGIBILTY


FIt{ANCIAL EVALUATIONREMARKS

1, Fatmi ImPex Yes Rs.11,353/' eia neSeCeO Ueing!n

2. MMB Solutions Yes Rs.9150O/- Bid beingtn

3, Global EnterPrises Yes Rs.A,479l' Bid accepted being lowest

Contd...P/6

I

VENDERS

in orice

v

-6-

LOT NO.9 (Bio Metric Attendance Devices) (1S Nos.t

L4. In response to the Tender/Advertisement, 02 bids were received from thefollowing Firm. After thorough evaluation of the Technical / Financial bids/rates quoted

by vender, the Financial Evaluation Committee prepared the comparison statement is as

under:-


15' In response to the Tender/Advertisement, 02 bids were received from thefollowing Firm. After thorough evaluation of the Technical / Financial bids/rates quotedby vender, the Financial Evaluation commiftee prepared the comparison statement is asunder:-


LoT NO.l1(UpS 5 KVA) (02 Nos.)

16' In response to the Tender/Advertisement, 03 bids were received from thefollowing Firms. After thorough evaluation of the Technical / Financial bids/rates quotedby venders, the Financial Evaluation Committee prepared the comparison statement isas under:-


sR.NO.


ELIGIBILTY



1. MMB SoluUons Yes Rs.35,000/- Bid Rejected beingH tn

2. Global Enterprises Yes Rs.24,819/- Bid accepted beiffiwestin price

sR.NO.


ELIGIBITTYNo


2. Shirazi Trading Yes Rs.15r591830/- Bid accepted beingin price

lowest

sR.NO.


ELIGIBILTY



1. Global Enterprises Yes Rs.11481884/- Bid Rejected being2. Octo-3 Technologies Yes Rs.11551163/ Bid Rejected being

3. Generation Systems Yes Ps,,1,42,8821- Bid accepted being Iowestin price

Contd...P17


AT

{_-7-

LOT ilO.12 (Heaqt Duhr Scanner) (O2 ilo.l

L7. In response to the Tender/AdverUsement, 01 bH was reelved from trefdlowing Firm. Afur thorurgh enaluauon of the Technlcal / Finandal bHgrats qr.roted

by venders, the Finarrclal Evaluauon committee prepared the comparison statement is

as under:-

Cemplrlson StatFmcnt

LOT NO. 13 ICR /Ol,lR/(rcR.,Barcode Rqadlno Soltwrrc (Ol l{os.)

18. ln response to Bte Tender/Advertisement, 01 bid was recelved from the

following Firm. After thorough evaluation of the Technical / Financlal bids/rates quoted

by venders, the Financial Evaluation C.ommlttee prepared the comparison statement is

as under:-

Comparlson Saatement

18, In response to the Tender/Adverfisement, No bld recelved agalnst Lot No. 14.

DECISION:

19. The Procurement C.ommittee declared the bid of the aforementioned

bidders who are responsive being lowest & recommended them for award of supply

order for the said procurement under Rules 2014.&u*Mr. Mu@mqg[Jarooq RajaDlrector/PSC,' PPSC

\.ryMr. MuhanimaU NaeemSystem Analyst\PeSC,Memberfl-echnical 0fficerMember

MrDirettor,Member

1trAccounts fficer. PPSC

Member

Mr. Rlaryan gddQrcNetwork Sysbm Englneer

Technhal Officer

M^RaoDlrector I.T. PPSC

(@nvener)

sR"ilo.

VENDEN.S TECHI{ICAL/ TEIIDER

EUGIBILTY

Unit Prlccwlttout GsT.

FII{AIICIAL EVALUATIO]In$lAru(s

1. Shirazl Trading Yes 8.6,92,309/- Bld rcoped Ddng bweetlnsie

SR.NO.

VET{DER!; TECHT{ICAL/ TEI{OER

EUGIBILTY

Unlt PrhcwithoutGST.

Fl,TfiCIAL EYALIJATIOT{RElil Rl(S

1. Shlnd Tradlng Yes R3.1+3+8e8/. Bld eccop0ed belng lorrestln orie

i

)

l

iI

I

i

I

{

ljI

I

I

I

minutesofthemeetingheldonii.o5.2oisatnoonand i't' and …

Documents