Wakilii

The Executive Committee of Iganga Central Market v Iganga Municipal Council [2025] UGPPDPAAT 36

Tribunal · 2025 Application Struck Out AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for review of procurement decision before the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Appeals Tribunal
Decision
Application struck out for lack of locus standi

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Tribunal held that the Executive Committee of Iganga Central Market lacked locus standi to challenge a procurement decision because it was neither a bidder nor a legal person whose rights were adversely affected. The committee did not purchase bidding documents, submit a bid, or demonstrate it was a potential bidder. The letter relied upon as an administrative review complaint was authored by an individual expressing personal views, not a valid complaint under the Public Procurement Act. Without locus standi, the application was struck out.

Outcome

Application struck out for lack of locus standi

Facts

Iganga Municipal Council initiated procurement for management of revenue collection from Iganga Central Market using open domestic bidding. The bid notice was published on July 3, 2025, with submission deadline July 25, 2025. Only one bid was received from Mukungu Racheal. On August 1, 2025, the Council issued a Notice of Best Evaluated Bidder naming Mukungu Racheal at UGX 2,850,000 per month. On August 6, 2025, Tanaziraba Elvis, writing on letterhead of the Chairman of Iganga Central Market, sent a letter alleging that Mukungu Racheal had misused a loan recommendation for bidding purposes and had market dues arrears. The Town Clerk did not respond. On August 22, 2025, the Executive Committee of Iganga Central Market filed an application before the Tribunal seeking to set aside the best evaluated bidder decision. The Executive Committee had not purchased bidding documents, submitted a bid, or participated in the procurement process.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant has locus standi to file the instant application
  2. Whether the Accounting Officer erred when he did not suspend the procurement upon receipt of the letter from Tanaziraba Elvis
  3. Whether the Accounting Officer erred when he did not respond to the letter from Tanaziraba Elvis
  4. Whether the declaration of Mukungu Rachael as the best evaluated bidder was erroneous
  5. What remedies are available to the parties

Orders

  • Application struck out.
  • Tribunal's suspension order dated August 22, 2025, vacated.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Administrative Law — Locus Standi — Public Procurement Appeals — Standing to Challenge Procurement Decisions
Under section 115(1)(a) and (c) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act Cap 205, only a bidder who is aggrieved or who believes the Accounting Officer has a conflict of interest may apply to the Tribunal for review. A bidder means a person intending to participate or participating in procurement proceedings. An entity that neither purchased bidding documents nor submitted a bid nor demonstrated in any way that it was a potential bidder cannot be regarded as a bidder and therefore lacks locus standi to lodge an administrative review complaint or pursue the matter before the Tribunal.
Administrative Law — Locus Standi — Legal Personality — Executive Committees
An executive committee that is not a natural person, corporate body, or association is not a person within the meaning of section 115(1)(b) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act Cap 205 and cannot approach the Tribunal as a person whose rights are adversely affected by a decision of the Accounting Officer.
Administrative Law — Administrative Review — What Constitutes a Valid Complaint
A letter expressing strong negative personal views about the character and conduct of a best evaluated bidder, written by an individual on office letterhead and addressed to the Town Clerk, does not constitute an administrative review complaint within the meaning of sections 106(1), (2), and (3) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act Cap 205 and regulation 4 of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets (Administrative Review) Regulations 2023.
Administrative Law — Administrative Review — Prerequisite for Tribunal Application
In the absence of a valid administrative review complaint to the Accounting Officer, an applicant cannot purport to apply to the Tribunal for review of a decision or failure to make a decision by the Accounting Officer.

Legislation cited (11)

Cases cited (1)

  • NJau & Others v City Council of Nairobi [1976-1985] 1 EA 397

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

The Executive Committee of Iganga Central Market v Iganga Municipal Council 2025 UGPPDPAAT 36 (9 September 2025)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.