We wish to submit a grievance regarding Tender No. **NICL/Procurement/2026/33**.

As per **PPRA Rule 10**, technical specifications should encourage the widest possible competition and should not favour a specific manufacturer, supplier, or brand. Where a brand reference is necessary, equivalent products should be allowed through clearly defined and objective equivalence criteria.

The tender requires bidders to be **Cisco Premier Partners**, possess **Cisco SMB Certification**, and submit a **Cisco-specific MAF**. These manufacturer-specific requirements significantly restrict competition and effectively limit participation to Cisco-authorized partners.

Further, the technical specifications refer to **Cisco Aironet 2800/3700 Series** and compatibility with **Cisco AIR-CT5508-K9**, while the bidding document itself states that the Aironet 2800/3700 series has been discontinued. This may unnecessarily exclude alternative compliant solutions.

We respectfully request NICL to review and amend these conditions by:

1. Removing Cisco-specific eligibility requirements.
2. Allowing manufacturer-neutral authorization.
3. Defining objective equivalence criteria.
4. Permitting technically compliant alternatives.

These amendments will promote fair competition, transparency, and better value under the LCBS procurement method.

Dear Sir,

We respectfully request clarification/reconsideration of the network switch eligibility criteria in Tender Ref. NICL/Procurement/2026/33, as the current requirements appear to restrict fair and open competition.

The tender specifies “or Equivalent”, but the eligibility criteria require the bidder to be a Cisco Premier Partner / Cisco SMB Certified and to provide a Cisco-specific MAF. This effectively excludes authorized partners of other equivalent OEMs such as HPE Aruba, TPLink, Huawei, etc., making the “or Equivalent” provision ineffective.

We therefore request NICL to make the eligibility requirements OEM-neutral, allowing authorized partners of any technically equivalent and compliant OEM to participate.

This will ensure transparency, equal opportunity, wider competition, and value for money in accordance with the principles of public procurement.

Regard's
Jamal Ahmed Khan
GM Operation
M/s: Kontinental Establishment
Cell: 0322-2579425
Email: jamal@ce.com.pk

Dear Sir,
It is requested that the equipment model no. of cisco access points is already announced end of life by the OEM back in 2021.
Detail links from OEM website are listed below:

Below are the links for EOL of 2800 and 3700

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/wireless/aironet-2800-series-access-points/aironet-2800-series-access-points-eol.html
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/wireless/retired.html

whereas, controller is also announced for EOL/EOS

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/wireless/5500-series-wireless-controllers/eos-eol-notice-c51-740221.html

SOLUTION:
1. ALSO PROCURE NEW CONTROLLER (9800 SERIES) WITH LATEST HW/SW ALONG COMPATABLE ACCESS POINTS. (9100/9000 SERIES)
2. ALSO REPLACE THE OLD EXISTING ACCESS POINTS WITH NEW MODELS, AS THE NEW CONTROLLER WILL NOT BE ABLE TO REGISTER WITH THE OLD ACCESS POINS.

Furhermore, it is mentioned that the equipment should be in the name of NICL from OEM. which is also not possible as OEM only list the equipment while selling. Old availale /unused local stocks are not covertable to the new accounts by the OEM.

Your timely intervention and response will be helpful for all to participate in this opportunity.
Best Regards