MADAN B. LOKUR, J.

The issue raised for our consideration is whether we should entertain this writ petition filed by the Petitioner (Tata Power) challenging a decision taken by the Empowered Group of Ministers on 14th August, 2008. This issue arises in view of an allegation of suppression of a material fact, an alleged absence of locus standii of Tata Power to maintain the writ petition and its delay and laches in approaching this Court for relief during which period several important and significant developments have taken place. In our opinion, all these allegations are well founded and this is not an appropriate case warranting the exercise of our discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution. In our opinion, the writ petition deserves in limine dismissal.

2. On or about 31st January, 2006 the Government of India through the Ministry of Power issued a global invitation for expression of interest for selecting a developer to set up an Ultra Mega Power Project (UMPP) of 400 mega watts at Sasan, District Sidhi in Madhya Pradesh. The Government invited a Request for Qualification followed by a Request for Proposal from the pre-qualified bidders.

3. There is no dispute that the Petitioner (Tata Power) was fully qualified and it also submitted a bid for the Sasan UMPP. Similarly, there is no dispute that Respondent No.5 (Reliance Power) was also qualified and submitted its bid.

4. The tender documents suggested that captive coal mines would be allotted to the Sasan UMPP and being a part of the project, they were linked for the exclusive use of the Sasan UMPP. In this regard, the Ministry of Coal of the Government of India approved the Moher and Moher-Amlori Extension Coal Blocks as captive coal mines for the Sasan UMPP. This was in September, 2006. A little later, the Chhatrasal Coal Block was also approved for captive use by the Sasan UMPP in October, 2006. Both the allocation letters are of some importance and will be adverted to a little later.

5. When the bids were opened, it was found that one Globleq Singapore Consortium (GSC) was the lowest bidder and, accordingly, on 28th December, 2006 a Letter of Intent was awarded to GSC for the Sasan UMPP. It transpires that it was later concluded by the Central Government that GSC did not possess the requisite qualifications as represented by it and so a letter was issued on 25th May, 2007 to all the qualified bidders to extend their bid validity for the Sasan UMPP. However, no reason was assigned for requiring the qualified bidders to extend the validity of their bids.

6. According to Tata Power, it did not extend its bid validity because it was known that the Letter of Intent had been awarded to GSC and in the absence of any specific reason requiring extension of the validity of the bid, Tata Power did not feel it necessary to comply with the request. On the other hand, Reliance Power extended its bid validity.

7. When the Central Government came to the conclusion that GSC was not qualified, it cancelled the Letter of Intent but did not issue the tender again. However, the bidders who had extended the validity of their bid were asked to match the rates quoted by GSC. Of the bidders left in the field, only Reliance Power could match the bid of GSC and it was, therefore, selected as the successful bidder and on 30th July, 2007 a Letter of Intent was issued to Reliance Power. This was followed soon after with a Power Purchase Agreement being entered into between the Central Government and Reliance Power on 7th August, 2007.

8. It appears that around this time, Reliance Power entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Government of Madhya Pradesh for setting up a 4000 mega watts power plant at Chitrangi in the State of Madhya Pradesh. In respect of the Chitrangi project, the Government of Madhya Pradesh had apparently written to the Government of India to permit Reliance Power to use incremental coal produced from the coal blocks allotted to Sasan UMPP for the power