Article 7.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, current edition. Resolution on an administrative offense under Part 2 of Article 7.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

ST 7.29 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. Failure to comply with the requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs when deciding on the method and conditions for determining the supplier (contractor, performer)

1. Making a decision on the method of determining the supplier (contractor, performer), including the decision to purchase goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs from a single supplier (contractor, performer), in violation of the requirements established by the legislation of the Russian Federation on contractual system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs (hereinafter also referred to as the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement), except for the cases provided for in parts 2, 2.1 and 4 of this article -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of thirty thousand rubles.

2. Making a decision on the method of determining the supplier (contractor, performer), including decisions on the purchase of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs from a single supplier (contractor, performer), if the determination of the supplier (contractor, performer) ) in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement should be carried out through a competition or auction, -

2.1. Making a decision to hold a competition with limited participation, a closed competition with limited participation, a two-stage competition, a closed two-stage competition, a closed competition, a closed auction in cases not provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement, or violation of the procedure and deadlines for sending to the authority , authorized to exercise control in the field of procurement, a federal executive body authorized to exercise control (supervision) functions in the field of state defense order and in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet federal needs that do not relate to the state defense order and information about which constitutes a state secret (hereinafter referred to as the control body in the field of state defense procurement), information and documents for agreeing on the use of a closed method for determining a supplier (contractor, performer), the possibility of concluding a contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer) -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of fifty thousand rubles.

3. The adoption by an official of the customer, an official of an authorized body of a decision to place a defense order through a closed tender without agreement with the control body in the field of state defense order, or the adoption of a decision to place a defense order through a closed tender on terms other than those agreed upon with control body in the field of state defense procurement, -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of thirty thousand to fifty thousand rubles.

4. Making a decision to place a state defense order with a single supplier (contractor, performer) in the event that the determination of the supplier (contractor, performer) in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement must be carried out through a competition or auction, -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of one hundred thousand rubles.

Commentary to Art. 7.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

1. The administrative offenses in question encroach on the procedure establishing the requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs when deciding on the method and conditions for determining the supplier (contractor, performer).

The specified procedure is provided for by the Federal Law “On the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, works, and services to meet state and municipal needs.”

2. The objective side of administrative offenses (Part 1 of Article 7.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation) consists of making a decision on the method of determining the supplier (contractor, performer), including the decision to purchase goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs from the only supplier (contractor, performer), in violation of the requirements established by the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs, except for the cases provided for in parts 2 and 2.1 of the commented article.

3. The objective side of administrative offenses (Part 2 of Article 7.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation) consists of making a decision on the method of determining the supplier (contractor, performer), including the decision to purchase goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs from the only supplier (contractor, performer), if the determination of the supplier (contractor, performer) in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement must be carried out through a competition or auction.

4. The objective side of administrative offenses (Part 2.1 of Article 7.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation) consists of making a decision to hold a competition with limited participation, a closed competition with limited participation, a two-stage competition, a closed two-stage competition, a closed competition, a closed auction in cases not provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement, or violation of the procedure and timing of referral to the body authorized to exercise control in the field of procurement, the federal executive body authorized to exercise control (supervision) functions in the field of state defense procurement and in the field of procurement goods, works, services to meet federal needs that do not relate to the state defense order and information about which constitutes a state secret, information and documents for agreeing on the use of a closed method for identifying a supplier (contractor, performer), the possibility of concluding a contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer).

5. The objective side of administrative offenses (Part 3 of Article 7.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation) consists in the adoption by an official of the customer, an official of an authorized body of a decision to place a defense order through closed bidding without the consent of the control body in the field of state defense procurement or making a decision on the placement of a defense order through closed bidding on conditions different from the conditions agreed upon with the control body in the field of state defense procurement.

6. The subjective side is characterized by intent and negligence.

7. The subjects of this offense are officials of customers, as well as officials of a federal executive body, an executive body of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, a local government body authorized to perform the functions of placing orders for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services for state or municipal needs .

In accordance with the note to Art. 2.4 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation persons performing the functions of a member of the commission for the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs, contract managers, contract service employees who have committed administrative offenses under Art. Art. 7.29 - 7.32, part 7, 7.1 art. 19.5, art. 19.7.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, bear administrative responsibility as officials.

8. Protocols on administrative offenses are drawn up by officials of bodies authorized to consider cases of this category (Part 1 of Article 28.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation).

9. Cases of administrative offenses are considered by officials of control bodies in the field of procurement in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement (Article 23.66 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation), the federal executive body exercising control and supervision functions in the field of state defense procurement ( Art. 23.82 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation).

1. Making a decision on the method of determining the supplier (contractor, performer), including the decision to purchase goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs from a single supplier (contractor, performer), in violation of the requirements established by the legislation of the Russian Federation on contractual system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs (hereinafter also referred to as the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement), except for the cases provided for in parts 2 and 2.1 of this article -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of thirty thousand rubles.

2. Making a decision on the method of determining the supplier (contractor, performer), including decisions on the purchase of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs from a single supplier (contractor, performer), if the determination of the supplier (contractor, performer) ) in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement should be carried out through a competition or auction, -

2.1. Making a decision to hold a competition with limited participation, a closed competition with limited participation, a two-stage competition, a closed two-stage competition, a closed competition, a closed auction in cases not provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement, or violation of the procedure and deadlines for sending to the authority , authorized to exercise control in the field of procurement, a federal executive body authorized to exercise control (supervision) functions in the field of state defense order and in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet federal needs that do not relate to the state defense order and information about which constitutes a state secret (hereinafter referred to as the control body in the field of state defense procurement), information and documents for agreeing on the use of a closed method for determining a supplier (contractor, performer), the possibility of concluding a contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer) -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of fifty thousand rubles.

3. The adoption by an official of the customer, an official of an authorized body of a decision to place a defense order through a closed tender without agreement with the control body in the field of state defense order, or the adoption of a decision to place a defense order through a closed tender on terms other than those agreed upon with control body in the field of state defense procurement, -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of thirty thousand to fifty thousand rubles.

Commentary on Article 7.29 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

1. The subject of the administrative offense in question is the procedure establishing restrictions when placing orders for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services for state or municipal needs without holding a tender by requesting price quotes or without concluding a contract. Such restrictions are provided for by the Federal Law of July 21, 2005 N 94-FZ “On placing orders for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services for state and municipal needs” and are aimed at ensuring the effective use of budget funds and extra-budgetary sources of financing, developing fair competition, preventing corruption and other abuses in the field of placing orders.

2. From the objective side, this offense is characterized by a violation of the requirements established by law for officials of authorized executive bodies and executive bodies of local self-government to make decisions on the method of placing an order for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services for state and municipal needs.

The qualified administrative offense provided for in Part 2 of the commented article is, from the objective side, characterized by making a decision to place state and municipal orders in a different way in cases where the legislation provides for the placement of state and municipal orders through bidding or bidding in the form of an auction.

3. From the subjective side, the offenses in question can be committed either intentionally or through negligence.

The subjects of the administrative structures provided for by the commented article can be officials of the state and municipal customer or a federal executive body, an executive body of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, or a local government body.

Within the framework of the article under consideration, in accordance with the note to Art. 2.4 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, an official must be understood as a person who permanently, temporarily or in accordance with special powers performs organizational, administrative or administrative functions for placing orders for the supply of goods, works and services for state or municipal needs in state bodies, local governments , state and municipal organizations, as well as in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops and military formations of the Russian Federation.

Judicial practice under Art. 7.29.3 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation appealing fines for violation of the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement when planning procurement

SVERDLOVSK REGIONAL COURT

Judge R.V. Stoyanov

Judge of the Sverdlovsk Regional Court Krasnova N.V., having considered in open court on March 14, 2017 Ya.’s complaint against the decision of the judge of the Oktyabrsky District Court of Yekaterinburg dated October 19, 2016 in the case of an administrative offense,

installed:

by the resolution of the Deputy Head of the Federal Treasury Department for the Sverdlovsk Region dated October 19, 2016 to the head of the contract service of the Federal State Institution “Financial Support Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation for the Sverdlovsk Region” Ya. under Part 1 of Art. 7.29 3 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, an administrative penalty was imposed in the form of a fine of 20,000 rubles for violation of Part 3, 18 Art. 22 of the Federal Law of April 5, 2013 N 44-FZ “On the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs.”
Based on the results of consideration of the complaint, the judge's decision left this resolution unchanged.
In the complaint, Ya. asks for the cancellation of the decisions taken in the case with the termination of the proceedings, citing the insignificance of the offense committed, pointing out the absence of negative consequences from the use of unreliable price information when calculating the initial (maximum) contract price when planning procurement and achieved as a result of auctions budget savings.

Having checked the case materials, having heard the explanations of Ya., who supported the arguments of the complaint, witness S., specialists M. and K., I find no grounds for canceling the decisions taken in the case.
Part 1 of Article 7.29.3 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses provides for administrative responsibility, in particular, for including in the procurement schedule the initial (maximum) price of the contract, including those concluded with a single supplier (contractor, performer), in respect of which the justification does not comply with the requirements established by the legislation of the Russian Federation and other regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement.
From the case materials it follows that the Federal Institution “Financial Support Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation for the Sverdlovsk Region” included in the schedule for placing orders for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services to meet state and municipal needs for 2016, posted on the website of the Unified Information systems in the field of procurement on August 18, 2016, 5 orders for which, to justify the initial (maximum) contract price, the method of comparable market prices (market analysis) was applied, using price information obtained without taking into account commercial and (or) financial conditions comparable to the terms of the planned purchase supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services, which violated Part 2, Part 3 of Art. 22 of the Federal Law of April 05, 2013 N 44-FZ “On the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs”, clause 3.13.3 of the Methodological recommendations for the use of methods for determining the initial (maximum) contract price and price of a contract concluded with a single supplier (contractor, performer), approved by order of the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia dated October 2, 2013 N 567. Thus, for order (lot) N 28 “Supply of office supplies”, a price request is attached to the justification of the initial (maximum) contract price information with Appendix No. 1, where position 11 indicates equipment for round printing with a diameter of no less than 45 mm and no more than 50 mm, while in the commercial offer from the supplier LLC "" the price was offered for equipment with a diameter of 40 mm, and this position was taken into account initial (maximum) contract price. For order (lot) N 31 “Supply of goods”, the justification for the initial (maximum) contract price is accompanied by a request for price information with Appendix N 2, where in position 3 “electronic table scales” the following technical characteristics are indicated: electronic table scales, maximum weight, g .: no less than 4000 and no more than 5000, size 16.0-16.4×12.5-13.0×3.0-3.6 cm, whereas in the commercial offer from the suppliers of Komus-Ural LLC, Redent Ch LLC offered a price for scales with the following technical characteristics: maximum weight 2 kg, platform size 150 mm, and this position was taken into account in calculating the initial (maximum) contract price; position 5 indicates an oil radiator with a heating area of ​​at least 15 square meters. m, the number of sections is at least 7, with a power of at least or equal to 1500 W, while in the commercial offer from suppliers Komus-Ural LLC, Kantz-Ek LLC, Redent Ch LLC the price is offered for an oil radiator having the following technical characteristics: 5 sections, with a power level of 1000 W, an area of ​​10 sq. m, and this position is taken into account in calculating the initial (maximum) contract price. In addition, I used information received under order (lot) No. 28 for the items “needle for filing documents”, “insert file” from the pages of sites on the Internet www.skb-vektor.ru, www.kanterburg.ru, www.torgofis.rf, which is not a public offer, which violated clause 2 of Part 18 of Art. 22 of the Federal Law of April 5, 2013 N 44-FZ.
Violations were identified during a scheduled on-site inspection carried out from August 29 to September 28, 2016 by the controller-auditor for control in the field of contractual relations of the Federal Criminal Code for the Sverdlovsk Region, S., and recorded in the report (case sheets 8 - 17).
These circumstances of the case are confirmed by the testimony of representatives of the Federal Criminal Code for the Sverdlovsk region S., Ch., M. and K.
Based on the fact of the identified violation, a protocol on an administrative offense was drawn up, meeting the requirements of Art. 28.2 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses (case sheets 93 - 98).
According to the order of the head of the Financial Support Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation for the Sverdlovsk Region No. 51 dated August 1, 2016, Ya. was appointed head of the contract service - deputy head of the department (organizational planning, financing and contract support), who is entrusted with the responsibility of submitting for approval to the head schedule, as well as on approval of the method for determining the supplier (contractor, performer), procurement documentation (clause 13 of the Regulations (Regulations) on the contract service of the Federal State Institution “Financial Support Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation for the Sverdlovsk Region”.
Thus, in accordance with Art. 2.4 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses Ya is an official who is responsible for violating the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement when planning procurement.
Having assessed the evidence obtained in its entirety in accordance with the requirements of Art. 26.2, 26.11 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, an official of an administrative body, and then a judge of the district court came to a reasonable conclusion that Ya. was guilty of committing an administrative offense under Part 1 of Art. 7.29.3 of this Code.
The administrative punishment assigned to Ya is fair, in accordance with the sanction of the said law.
A reference in the complaint to the existence of grounds for recognizing the administrative offense charged by Ya as insignificant and terminating the proceedings on the administrative offense in accordance with Art. 2.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, is untenable. According to the explanation contained in paragraph 21 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 24, 2005 No. 5 “On some issues that arise for the courts when applying the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences”, the qualification of an administrative offense as minor can only take place in exceptional cases cases and must be correlated with the nature and degree of potential danger of the act committed, as well as with the infliction or threat of harm to the individual, society or the state.
Meanwhile, the grounds for recognizing the act committed by Ya as insignificant and releasing her from administrative liability on the basis of Art. 2.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation is not available.
The offense committed by Ya encroaches on the regulated procedure for the procurement of goods for state needs, ensuring transparency in the implementation of such procurement, preventing corruption and other abuses, as well as identifying the objectively best conditions for the execution of the contract. In this case, a significant threat to protected social relations does not lie in the occurrence of any material consequences from the offense, but in Ya’s neglectful attitude towards the performance of his duties, which resulted in an unlawful infringement of the rights and legitimate interests of the auction participant.
There were no significant violations of procedural requirements during the proceedings.
Under such circumstances, there are no grounds for canceling the decisions taken in the case and satisfying the complaint.
Guided by Art. 30.9, clause 1, part 1, art. 30.7 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, judge

decision of the judge of the Oktyabrsky District Court of Yekaterinburg dated October 19, 2016, issued on a complaint against the decision of the deputy head of the Federal Treasury Department for the Sverdlovsk Region dated October 19, 2016 on the imposition of administrative punishment on Ya. under Part 1 of Art. 7.29.3 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences, leave unchanged, Ya.’s complaint - without satisfaction.

1. Making a decision on the method of determining the supplier (contractor, performer), including the decision to purchase goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs from a single supplier (contractor, performer), in violation of the requirements established by the legislation of the Russian Federation on contractual system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs (hereinafter also referred to as the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement), except for the cases provided for in parts 2, 2.1 and 4 of this article -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of thirty thousand rubles.

2. Making a decision on the method of determining the supplier (contractor, performer), including decisions on the purchase of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs from a single supplier (contractor, performer), if the determination of the supplier (contractor, performer) ) in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement should be carried out through a competition or auction, -

2.1. Making a decision to hold a competition with limited participation, a closed competition with limited participation, a two-stage competition, a closed two-stage competition, a closed competition, a closed auction in cases not provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement, or violation of the procedure and deadlines for sending to the authority , authorized to exercise control in the field of procurement, a federal executive body authorized to exercise control (supervision) functions in the field of state defense order and in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet federal needs that do not relate to the state defense order and information about which constitutes a state secret (hereinafter referred to as the control body in the field of state defense procurement), information and documents for agreeing on the use of a closed method for determining a supplier (contractor, performer), the possibility of concluding a contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer) -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of fifty thousand rubles.

3. The adoption by an official of the customer, an official of an authorized body of a decision to place a defense order through a closed tender without agreement with the control body in the field of state defense order, or the adoption of a decision to place a defense order through a closed tender on terms other than those agreed upon with control body in the field of state defense procurement, -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of thirty thousand to fifty thousand rubles.

4. Making a decision to place a state defense order with a single supplier (contractor, performer) in the event that the determination of the supplier (contractor, performer) in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement must be carried out through a competition or auction, -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of one hundred thousand rubles.

Commentary to Art. 7.29 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

1. The subject of the administrative offense in question is the procedure establishing restrictions when placing orders for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services for state or municipal needs without holding a tender by requesting price quotes or without concluding a contract. Such restrictions are provided for by the Federal Law of July 21, 2005 N 94-FZ “On placing orders for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services for state and municipal needs” and are aimed at ensuring the effective use of budget funds and extra-budgetary sources of financing, developing fair competition, preventing corruption and other abuses in the field of placing orders.

2. From the objective side, this offense is characterized by a violation of the requirements established by law for officials of authorized executive bodies and executive bodies of local self-government to make decisions on the method of placing an order for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services for state and municipal needs.

The qualified administrative offense provided for in Part 2 of the commented article is, from the objective side, characterized by making a decision to place state and municipal orders in a different way in cases where the legislation provides for the placement of state and municipal orders through bidding or bidding in the form of an auction.

3. From the subjective side, the offenses in question can be committed either intentionally or through negligence.

The subjects of the administrative structures provided for by the commented article can be officials of the state and municipal customer or a federal executive body, an executive body of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, or a local government body.

Within the framework of the article under consideration, in accordance with the note to Art. 2.4 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, an official must be understood as a person who permanently, temporarily or in accordance with special powers performs organizational, administrative or administrative functions for placing orders for the supply of goods, works and services for state or municipal needs in state bodies, local governments , state and municipal organizations, as well as in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops and military formations of the Russian Federation.

Post navigation

1. Making a decision on the method of determining the supplier (contractor, performer), including the decision to purchase goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs from a single supplier (contractor, performer), in violation of the requirements established by the legislation of the Russian Federation on contractual system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs (hereinafter also referred to as the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement), except for the cases provided for in parts 2, 2.1 and 4 of this article -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of thirty thousand rubles.

2. Making a decision on the method of determining the supplier (contractor, performer), including decisions on the purchase of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs from a single supplier (contractor, performer), if the determination of the supplier (contractor, performer) ) in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement should be carried out through a competition or auction, -

2.1. Making a decision to hold a competition with limited participation, a closed competition with limited participation, a two-stage competition, a closed two-stage competition, a closed competition, a closed auction in cases not provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement, or violation of the procedure and deadlines for sending to the authority , authorized to exercise control in the field of procurement, a federal executive body authorized to exercise control (supervision) functions in the field of state defense order and in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet federal needs that do not relate to the state defense order and information about which constitutes a state secret (hereinafter referred to as the control body in the field of state defense procurement), information and documents for agreeing on the use of a closed method for determining a supplier (contractor, performer), the possibility of concluding a contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer) -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of fifty thousand rubles.

3. The adoption by an official of the customer, an official of an authorized body of a decision to place a defense order through a closed tender without agreement with the control body in the field of state defense order, or the adoption of a decision to place a defense order through a closed tender on terms other than those agreed upon with control body in the field of state defense procurement, -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of thirty thousand to fifty thousand rubles.

4. Making a decision to place a state defense order with a single supplier (contractor, performer) in the event that the determination of the supplier (contractor, performer) in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement must be carried out through a competition or auction, -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of one hundred thousand rubles.

• Administrative responsibility of officials
• Administrative responsibility of military personnel, citizens called up for military training, and persons with special ranks
• Administrative penalty
• Limitation period for administrative liability
• Violation of the procedure for mandatory bidding in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, the sale of state or municipal property, the procedure for concluding contracts based on the results of such bidding and sale, or in the event that such bidding is declared invalid

  2. Violation of the procedure for determining the form of holding mandatory tenders in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, with the exception of cases provided for in Articles 7.29 and 7.32.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, -

• Control bodies in the field of procurement in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contract system in the field of procurement

  1. Control authorities in the field of procurement consider cases of administrative offenses provided for in parts 1 - 2.1, 4 of Article 7.29, parts 1 - 4.2, 6 - 8, 10, 11, 13, 14 of Article 7.30, part 2 of Article 7.31, Article 7.31. 1, parts 1 - 6 of Article 7.32, part 1 of Article 7.32.5, Article 7.32.6 (within the limits of their powers, with the exception of the sphere of state defense order), part 11 of Article 9.16 (except for the sphere of state defense order and the sphere of state secrets) , part 7 of article 19.5, article 19.7.2 (except for the sphere of state defense procurement and the sphere of state secrets) of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

• Federal executive body exercising control and supervision functions in the field of state defense procurement