The authority to cancel a tender prevails under administrative discretion, based on the rationale of maintaining integrity, fairness, and transparency in public procurement processes.

JUDGMENT :

ALOK KUMAR SINHA, J.

1. Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner in the present writ application seeks the following main relief:

“(i) Quashing of the decision of the Technical Evaluation Committee as contained in Memo No. 2469 dated 30.06.2025 (Annexure P/6) (uploaded on 01.07.2025) by which mechanically differing with the report of the jurisdictional Executive Engineer with regard to the insufficient bid capacity of the Respondent No. 6 and without assigning any reason the technical bid of the Respondent No. 6 was declared to be responsive.

(ii) Quashing of the decision of the Technical Evaluation Committee as contained in Memo No. 2477 dated 01.07.2025 (Annexure P/7) by which in the absence of any objection and on the same day on which the earlier proceeding was uploaded, without there being any chance in circumstance, the technical evaluation committee has reconvened its meeting and reiterated the earlier decision with regard to the declaration of responsiveness of the technical bid of Respondent No. 6.

(iii) Quashing of the decision of the Technical Bid Evaluation Committee bearing Memo No. 2611 dated 14.07.2025 (Annexure P/9) by which after financial bid evaluation, the Respondents have re-evaluated the technical bid of the Lowest Bidder (L-1) and subsequently, declared his technical bid responsive on account of insufficient bid capacity, and entire tender has been recommended to be canceled with the further recommendation for re-advertisement for the reason that the rates have been opened and the confidentiality of the tender stands vitiated.

(iv) Directing the Respondents to consider the Representation/ Request dated 16.05.2025 (Annexure P/10) wherein, the petitioner has requested for award of work in his favour as he was the 2nd Lowest Bidder and has consented to complete the work at the lowest evaluated price as quoted by L-1; and

(v) Restraining the Respondents from giving effect to the decision contained in Memo No. 2611 dated 14.07.2025 during the pendency of the present writ application and/or the without the leave of this Hon'ble Court.

(vi) Quashing of the Short Notice Inviting Tender No. RRRSMP-15/2025-26 dated 22.07.2025 signed by the Engineer In- Chief and uploaded on 26.07.2025 by which giving effect to the Impugned Order of cancellation of the earlier tender, the work which is the subject matter of the present writ application has been re-advertised on the same terms and conditions; and”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while assailing the impugned decisions of the Respondents, has set out the broad facts and grounds upon which the present writ application rests. It is submitted that the petitioner is a contractor registered in Class-I under the Bihar Contractors Registration Rules, 2007 and has been engaged in execution of various works on behalf of governmental organizations.

4. The genesis of the controversy, as canvassed by the petitioner, lies in the issuance of Notice Inviting Tender No. RRRSMP-15/2024-25 dated 27.02.2025 for “Initial Rectification, Minor Improvement, Surface Renewal, Construction of Bridge/Drainage/Protection Work including Operation and Management for the Rural Road Strengthening and Management Program under the component of Mukhya Mantri Gramin Sadak Unnayan Yojana (GEN) (MMGSUY),” with special reference to Package No. RRRSMP/24-25 Sasaram-1/11 at Serial No. 1, the total contract value being Rs. 3520.452 Lacs (Annexure: P/1).

5. It is submitted that altogether ten bid