SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Bom) 640

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Alok Aradhe, C.J., M. S. Karnik, J.
Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. (Coal Sales) Ltd. & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
Maharashtra state Power Generation Co. Ltd. & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No.3590 of 2024, Interim Application (L) No.17609 of 2024
Decided On : 09-04-2025

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Zal Andhyarujina, Senior Advocate with Ms. Ishani Khanwilkar, Mr. Munaf virjee, Mr. Tirtha Mukherjee i/b. AMR Law for the petitioners
Dr. Birendra Saraf, Senior Advocate with Ms. Amita Chaware for respondent No.1 and 2
Ms. Jyoti Chavan, Additional Government Pleader with
Ms. Nazia Sheikh, AGP for respondent No.3 – State Ms. Saloni Manjrekar i/b. HH Legal for respondent No.4
Ms. Nikita Bhansali a/w. Mr. Tejas Gupta and Ms.
Roshni Bhati i/b. Yasmin Bhansali & Co. for respondent No.5

The court affirmed that a bidder's prior blacklisting by a Government entity justifies the rejection of its tender bid, emphasizing adherence to eligibility criteria in tender documents.

Headnote:

(A) Constitution of India - Article 12 - Maharashtra Electricity Duty Act, 2016 - Definition of 'independent power producer' - The petitioner challenged the rejection of its bid by MAHAGENCO on grounds of blacklisting by BPSCPL, which was deemed a Government entity. The court found that the petitioner was debarred from participation in tenders due to prior blacklisting, affirming the validity of the rejection. (Paras 13, 19)

(B) Tender Process - Eligibility Criteria - The court emphasized that the eligibility criteria in the tender document must be adhered to, and the petitioner was estopped from claiming BPSCPL was not a Government entity after previously asserting otherwise. (Paras 18, 19)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a coal sales company, had its bid rejected by MAHAGENCO due to blacklisting by BPSCPL, which the petitioner contested, arguing that BPSCPL was not a Government entity. The court examined the definitions and implications of the terms in the tender document.

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that BPSCPL is a Government entity and the rejection of the petitioner's bid was justified based on the blacklisting. The petitioner was advised to disclose any interim orders from the Calcutta High Court in future tenders.

Issues: The primary issue was whether BPSCPL qualifies as a Government entity or an independent power producer, impacting the eligibility of the petitioner’s bid.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioner’s prior assertions regarding BPSCPL being a Government entity precluded it from contesting this status later, affirming the rejection of the bid based on the blacklisting.

Result: Writ petition disposed of.

JUDGMENT

(PER : CHIEF JUSTICE)

Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, heard finally.

2. The Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. (Coal Sales) Ltd. (petitioner) is a company, engaged in the business of liaisoning, movement, handling and delivery of raw coal from Coalfields to Thermal Power stations by by rail as well as rail-sea route. Mr. Sampat Shete is the Director of the petitioner.

(A) CHALLENGE:

3. In this petition, the bid of the petitioner has been rejected by the Chief Engineer (Fuel Management) MAHAGENCO (Chief Engineer). The petitioners have also assailed the validity of e- mail dated 17th May 2024 by which the Chief Engineer issued a notice for forfeiture of EMD amount of the petitioner. In order to appreciate the grievance of the petitioners, relevant facts need mention, which are stated infra.

(B) FACTS:

4. The Bokaro Power Supply Company (P) Ltd. (BPSCPL), on 22nd October 2022 issued a Notice Inviting Tender for the work of linkage materialisation and shortage minimization for Coal Supply from Central Coalfields Ltd. (CCL) to BPSCPL. The estimated value of the contract was Rs.37,58,841 (excluding GST). On 14th November 2022, petitioner submitted its bid for an amount of Rs.21,00,00,000/- (Twenty-one crores only) and was informed by an email dated 11th May 2023 that the bid submitted by the petitioner is accepted and the reverse auction would be held on 12th May 2023. The petitioner, on 12th May 2023 logged into the portal to participate in the reverse auction process and learnt that start price of the auction was a meagre sum of INR 21/- for the entire tendered quantity. The petitioner, thereupon immediately submitted a representation to BPSCPL to annul the reverse auction process. However, the BPSCPL continued with the auction process in which no bidder participated.

5. The BPSCPL, on 14th July 2023 debarred the petitioner from participating in any auction of tender for a period of one year. The petitioner, thereupon on 31st July 2023 filed a writ petition No.18476 of 2023 before the Calcutta High court against the order dated 14th July 2023.

6. The Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited (MAHAGENCO) on 10th November 2023 commenced sale of e- tender document for appointment of Supervision, Monitoring & Co-ordination (SMC) agency for the work of supervision of coal rakes movements, coal quantity and quality monitoring, loading of quality coal and movement of sized coal for various TPS of MAHAGENCO from Western Coalfields Ltd. The period of contract was one year with provision for extension of six months, subject to performance. The petitioner, on 22nd November 2023 made payment of Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rs. Five lac) in favour of MAHAGENCO and on 22nd December 2023 the petitioner submitted its bid in response to the aforesaid e- tender. However, MAHAGENCO, on 23rd January 2024 rejected the bid of the petitioner and on 31st January 2024 accepted the bids of respondent Sendoz Commercials Private Limited and Godavari Commodities Limited and issued a letter of award in their favour. In the meantime, the petitioner submitted representation on 30th January 2024. The MAHAGENCO, vide response dated 9th February 2024, informed the petitioner that the petitioner was debarred/blacklisted by BPSCPL for a period of one year from 14th July 2023 and therefore, the bid of the petitioner was rejected. The petitioner, thereupon, submitted another communication dated 10th February 2024 to MAHAGENCO stating that the petitioner has not violated any terms of the tender. The learned Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court, by an ad-interim order dated 19th February 2024 stayed the order dated 14th July 2023 of debarment / blacklisting the petitioner till 31st March 2024 or until further order, whichever is earlier.

7. The MAHAGENCO, on 21st March 2024 issued work order in favour of Sendoz Commercials Private Limited and Godavari Commodities Limited. The learned Single

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top