Back
SHAMPA SARKAR
Jana Enterprise – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SHAMPA SARKAR, J.
1. The writ petition arises out of award of a contract in favour of the respondent no. 8. The Director, ESI (MB) Scheme, West Bengal floated a notice inviting e-tender from all bona fide, registered, eligible and resourceful agencies for engagement of such agency to provide partial conservancy services at the ESI Hospitals at Belur, Budge Budge, Gourhati and Maniktala.
2. The sum and substance of the allegations made in the writ petition are that the tendering authority did not follow the Memorandum dated June 7, 2022 issued by the Government of West Bengal, Finance Department, Audit Branch, Group – T (hereinafter referred to as the said memo). Situation – III of the said memo provides the steps that are to be taken by the authority in case of a tie amongst the L-1 bidders. The petitioner was the L-1 bidder along with others, including the respondent no. 8. The minimum rate quoted by all L-1 bidders was Rs.300/-. It is alleged that instead of following the procedure laid down in Situation – III (A), the tendering authority decided to evaluate the successful bidders on certain other parameters. The relevant portion of such method is quoted below: -
The court affirmed that adherence to established tendering procedures is crucial, and deviations must be justified; otherwise, the authority's decisions should not be interfered with.
The tendering authority's decision should not be interfered with unless it is mala fide, arbitrary, or irrational.
Judicial review in tender matters is limited; courts should not interfere unless actions are arbitrary, discriminatory, or biased.
The court established that significant deviations from tender guidelines and arbitrary evaluation criteria violate the principles of fairness and proportionality under Article 14 of the Constitution.
The court mandated adherence to tender conditions, emphasizing that procedural violations invalidate selections made via non-compliance with established rules.
Judicial review in public procurement is limited; courts refrain from interference unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or bad faith is established.
Judicial review of tender conditions is limited; courts should not interfere unless actions are arbitrary, discriminatory, or mala fide, ensuring public interest is prioritized.
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
