Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ALOK ARADHE, CJ, M.S.KARNIK, J
Contract For Emergency Medical Services – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(PER : CHIEF JUSTICE)
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, heard finally.
(A) CHALLENGE:
2. The subject matter of PIL is a tender viz. tender bearing No.Ref No.E-08/MEMS/23-24 dated 4th January 2024 issued by the Commissioner, Health Service and Mission Director, National Health Mission, Mumbai for design, build, finance, operate and transfer (PPP-DBFOT Hybrid Model) Maharashtra Emergency Medical Services (MEMS) Project 2024 (subject tender). The challenge in this petition is to the subject tender as well as the Government Resolution dated 15th March 2024 issued by the Secretary, Public Health Department, State of Maharashtra. A direction is sought to conduct a full-fledged inquiry, with regard to the illegal transactions leading to the subject tender as well as the subsequent transactions which led to Government Resolution dated 15th March 2024. In addition, a direction is also sought to issue guidelines for award of MEMS project and to lay down standard guidelines pertaining to supply of manpower. The successful tenderer viz. the consortium has filed writ petition No.13113 of 2024 seeking a direction to respondent Nos
Judicial review of tender processes is limited to preventing arbitrariness and ensuring transparency, not to reassess the soundness of administrative decisions.
Judicial review of tender processes is limited to preventing arbitrariness and ensuring transparency, with minimal interference in public interest projects.
Judicial review in public procurement is limited; courts refrain from interference unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or bad faith is established.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for free play in the joints by the authorities and the interest of public service. The court emphasized the importance of minimal interfer....
Judicial review of tender conditions is limited; courts should not interfere unless actions are arbitrary, discriminatory, or mala fide, ensuring public interest is prioritized.
Point of Law : Court would not sit in the arm chair of experts or the Tender Scrutiny Committee, which has scrutinized and found the 3rd respondent to be responsive and had to be awarded the contract....
The court upheld that 100% reservation for MSEs in public procurement is valid under the MSE Policy, rejecting claims of arbitrariness towards tender selection processes.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
