Back
SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA
Jai Hind Logistics – Appellant
Versus
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.
1. The petitioner and the respondent nos.9 and 10 participated in a tender floated by the IOCL (Indian Oil Corporation Limited) under a Two-Bid System from Tank Truck (TT) owners for an award of contract for road transportation of bulk petroleum products. The petitioner participated therein but was disqualified at the technical evaluation stage.
2. The present writ petition has been preferred challenging the acceptance of the bids of respondent nos.9 and 10 as successful bidders.
3. It is argued that, after the technical stage being crossed, a reverse auction was to be held within the contemplation of the tender. Thereafter, the bidder with the newest vehicles would be chosen as successful and work orders would be issued to them.
4. In the present case, it is argued, the respondent nos.9 and 10 furnished forged documents, on the basis which they were declared to be successful bidders. It is argued by the petitioner that fraud vitiates all and, as such, even the writ court can enter into the question as to whether the forgery committed by the respondent nos.9 and 10, allegedly in collusion with the IOCL, vitiates the tender process.
Participants in a tender process, after becoming unsuccessful, should not be permitted to turn back and challenge the tender process, especially when they fail to substantiate specific allegations of....
If two views are possible the Court should not impose the other view in the instant case.
Compliance with specific pre-qualification criteria and terms and conditions of a tender notice is crucial for the acceptance of a bid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of tenders must be based on valid legal grounds and cannot be arbitrary or unfair. The court emphasized the importance of legal ....
The court upheld that adherence to tender guidelines by public entities is essential, and allegations of impropriety must be substantiated for judicial intervention.
The discretion of the tender issuing authority in accepting bids and the requirement for 'material deviations' from critical provisions under NIT clauses.
An entity is vicariously liable for the fraudulent acts of its employees in tender processes, and blacklisting is a significant action taken in public interest when misconduct is identified.
Absence of authorisation in experience certificate does not constitute fraudulent practice unless knowingly misrepresented to mislead; courts exercise limited review in tenders, deferring to authorit....
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
