awarding authority may reject lowest responsible bid that does not conform to awarding authority’s specifications
How later courts described this case
- awarding authority may reject lowest responsible bid that does not conform to awarding authority’s specifications
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
*68 Whittemore, J.
(dissenting) The ordinance and the corresponding provisions of the bidding documents appear to me repugnant to the requirements of G. L. c. 149, § 44A, that “ [e]very contract . . . shall be awarded to the lowest responsible and eligible general bidder on the basis of competitive bids in accordance with the procedure set forth in the provisions of sections forty-four B to fortyrfour L” (emphasis supplied), and of § 44K that “the department [of labor and industries] . . . enforce sections forty-four A to forty-four J, inclusive, and . . . have all necessary powers ... to institute and prosecute proceedings ... to restrain the performance of any contract . . . not awarded in conformity therewith” (emphasis supplied). The statutory requirements are precise and detailed. They manifest an intention that the complicated procedures with which bidders and awarding authorities must comply and which the department must enforce be uniform. In the light of the other provisions of the statute it does not appear to me that the right in the awarding authority under § 44D to reject a bid “in the public interest” can support a modification of the statutory procedure by ordinance or by provisions of the bidding documents.