Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ALOK ARADHE, SANDEEP V.MARNE
Hemant Ashar – Appellant
Versus
Nashik Municipal Smart City Development Corporation Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to work order based on tender eligibility. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. claims of fraud in tender process. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. assessing locus standi of the petitioner. (Para 9 , 10 , 12) |
| 4. legal standing must be established for review. (Para 14 , 18) |
| 5. inquiry directed despite petition dismissal. (Para 19 , 21) |
Judgment:
1) The Petitioner has filed the present Petition seeking termination of work order dated 29 December 2022 issued in favour of Respondent No.3 and for cancellation of the tender process. Petitioner has also prayed for appointment of appropriate enquiry committee for conducting investigations into the entire tender process. He has also prayed for recovery of money paid to Respondent No.3 in pursuance of work order dated 29 December 2022.
Respondent No.1-Nashik Municipal Smart City Development Corporation Ltd. issued E-Tender for a proposal for implementation and maintenance of Integrated Surveillance and City Operations Platforms (ISCOP) for Emergency Operation Center (EOC) in Nashik on 5 July 2022. The timeline for completion of work under the tender was 12 months from the date of issuance of work order with operation and maintenance. Under the pre- qua
A non-participant in a tender process lacks locus standi to challenge tender decisions, affirming that timely grievances are essential to public project integrity.
The petitioner's lack of locus standi due to not fulfilling the technical qualification criteria and gross delay in approaching the court led to the dismissal of the writ petition.
Judicial intervention in tender processes is limited to preventing arbitrariness; courts prioritize public interest over individual grievances when evaluating tender acceptance decisions.
Lowest bidder has no right to public contract without essential eligibility compliance; judicial review limited to arbitrariness in process, not merits or substitution of authority's decision.
The court emphasized the need for fairness and transparency in the tender process and held that the principles of judicial review apply to prevent arbitrariness or favoritism in the exercise of contr....
An unsuccessful bidder cannot challenge the award of a tender if disqualified in the technical evaluation, as they lack standing to do so.
An unsuccessful bidder lacks standing to challenge the issuance of a Letter of Intent when disqualified for failing to meet mandatory requirements.
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
