JMD Services Private Limited vs State of Bihar

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Pat) 286

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, PARTHA SARTHY
JMD Services Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Y.V. Giri, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Shrishti Singh, Advocate, Mr. Pranav Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Devashish Giri, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. P.K. Shahi, AG, Mr. P.K. Verma, AAG-3, Mr. Vikas Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Amish Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Arvind Kumar, Mr. Lalit Kishore, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Ayush Kumar, Mr. Kanishka Shankar, Advocate, Mr. Prabhat Ranjan, Advocate

Table of Content
1. issues regarding the tender cancellation. (Para 1 , 2 , 5)
2. statutory compliance in the tender's clauses. (Para 3 , 4 , 21)
3. arguments about public interest and the legality of the tender conditions. (Para 16 , 19 , 20)
4. principles guiding judicial review in government contracts. (Para 27 , 28 , 30)
5. conclusion affirming the dismissal of writ petitions. (Para 40 , 41)

JUDGMENT :

Ashutosh Kumar, ACJ

The central issues in all the writ petitions are:(a) Whether the Government/ Government Agency is justified in cancelling the tender which was issued inviting bidders for empanelment of agencies only on the ground of one of the conditions in the tender being technically incorrect and not in conformity with the Private Securities Agencies (Regulation) Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 2005')?; (b) Whether the contract with the successful bidders under the tender could be cancelled without issuing notice to them?; (c) Whether the faulty condition in the tender could be segregated and the already entered into contract could be saved?; (d) Whether the State has the authority to cancel the tender when the selection process has not been adversely commented u