Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A.S. CHANDURKAR, M.M. SATHAYE
Yashodhara Mahila Sahakari Audyogik Utpadak Sanstha Maryadit, Nashik – Appellant
Versus
Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development Department, Thane – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.M. SATHAYE, J.
1. These petitions involve similar set of facts and the arguments advanced are also common. Therefore these petitions are being disposed of by a common order.
2. The Petitioner is common in all these petitions, who is challenging the order/decision dated 08/10/2024 passed by Respondent No.1 (Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, Department, Thane) with respect to e-tender for providing food services to tribal students in hostels, under Integrated Tribal Development Project Jawahar, District Palghar, for a period of 2 years being 2024-25 and 2025-26. The Petitioner is seeking further directions to Respondents to issue work orders in its favour being L-1 Bidder.
CASE AND SUBMISSIONS
3. For the sake of convenience, case made out in Writ Petition No.14371 of 2024 is being narrated. On 24/07/2024, Respondent No.1 published a tender inviting bids for food supply for the hostel of tribal students. The Petitioner submitted technical and final bids through online process. On 30/08/2024, the Petitioner’s technical bid was accepted and it was qualified for opening of its final bid. On 04/09/2024, the financial bids were opened and since the Petitioner had quoted
Judicial review in tender processes is limited; changes in evaluation methods must ensure fairness and quality, not arbitrary outcomes.
Judicial review in tender processes is limited; courts intervene only in cases of arbitrariness or mala fides, and evaluation methods must ensure quality outcomes.
Judicial review of tender processes is limited to cases of arbitrariness or mala fides; the government has discretion in bid evaluations to ensure quality outcomes.
Judicial review in tender processes is limited to cases of arbitrariness or mala fides; the application of a base-rate method for bid evaluation was justified to ensure quality.
Judicial review in tender processes is limited; courts should not interfere unless there's clear arbitrariness or malafides in the decision-making process.
Judicial review in tender matters requires restraint, emphasizing compliance with the tendering authority’s interpretation unless clear evidence of wrongfulness is established.
The court ruled that bids below the justified rate are non-responsive, emphasizing judicial respect for expert evaluations in tendering processes.
The court mandated adherence to tender conditions, emphasizing that procedural violations invalidate selections made via non-compliance with established rules.
Tender evaluation must adhere strictly to the established criteria, and rejection based on erroneous interpretations undermines fairness and legality in public procurement 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
