IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Vipin Sanghi, Jasmeet Singh, JJ.
Sabre GLBL Inc. - Appellant
Versus
Air India Limited - Respondent
W.P.(C) 6046 of 2021 & CM Appl. 19132 of 2021
Decided On : 17-11-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks quashing of tender award. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. respondent no.1's financial status and tender details. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. bid submission and evaluation criteria outlined. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. pre-bid conference addressed queries. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. allegations of favoritism in evaluation of bids. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 6. validity of evaluation process and transparency. (Para 24 , 25) |
| 7. details on respondent no.2's experience and qualifications. (Para 30 , 31) |
| 8. judicial review principles in tender evaluations. (Para 37 , 38) |
| 9. court's rationale for non-interference in tender process. (Para 40 , 41) |
| 10. public interest and urgency in procurement process. (Para 46 , 48) |
JUDGMENT
Jasmeet Singh, J. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking substantially the following prayers:
a) "Issue a writ of certiorari or mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring and setting aside the award of Tender No: AIL/21-22/PSS/01 dated 31.03.2021 issued by the Respondent No.1 for Appointment of a Service Provider for providing Integrated Passenger Services Systems to Respondent No.2, as invalid and non-est;
b) Issue a writ of certiorari or mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction setting aside the LOI or the contract, if any, entered between the Respondents for Appointment of a Service Provider for providing Integrated Passenger Services Systems for Air India Limited, pursuant to the award of the Tender No: AIL/21-22/PSS/01 dated 31.03.2021 issued by the Respondent No.1 to Respondent No.2;
c) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing the Respondent No.1's decision dated June 8, 2021, as communicated to the Petitioner vide e-mail of the even date, declaring Petitioner unsuccessful for award of Tender No: AIL/21-22/PSS/01 dated 31.03.2021, as illegal, invalid and non-est in the eyes of law;
d) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the Petitioner as Successful Bidder and directing the Respondent No. 1 to formalise and award the contract for Appointment of a Service Provider for providing Integrated Passenger Services Systems for Air India Limited to Petitioner in Tender No: AIL/21-22/PSS/01 dated 31.03.2021;
e) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari commanding the Respondent No.1, to produce the entire records of the award of Tender No: AIL/21-22/PSS/01 dated 31.03.2021 to Respondent No.2, including, the records containing evaluation of the technical and financial bids by the Respondent No.1, the technical and financial scores received by the Petitioner and the Respondent No.2, and all other relevant records/file noting containing the basis of formation of opinion for issuing the Tender to Respondent No.2
f) Issue a writ of prohibition, prohibiting the Respondent No.1, during the pendency of the present Writ Petition, from giving Letter of Intent or executing any contract or proceeding with and/or taking any steps pursuant to their decision to award Tender No: AIL/21-22/PSS/01 dated 31.03.2021 to Respondent No.2....... "
(emphasis supplied)
2. The Petitioner claims that it is a leading software and technology company that powers the global travel industry, serving a wide range of travel companies including airlines, hoteliers, travel agencies and other suppliers. The Petitioner is headquartered in Southlake, Texas, USA and serves in more than 160 countries around the world and is a leading technology solutions provider. It is further submitted that the Petitioner has pioneered online travel agencies, corporate booking tools, revenue management, and web and mobile itinerary tools, amongst others.
3. It has further been submitted that the Petitioner's technology platform manages more than USD 260 Billion worth of global travel spend annually and is one of the world's largest providers of airline and hotel technology. The customer base of the Petitioner includes American Ai
The interpretation of eligibility criteria in public tenders is best determined by the tendering authority, and judicial review is limited to preventing arbitrariness or mala fides.
Judicial review in public procurement is limited; courts refrain from interference unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or bad faith is established.
The court upheld the government's decision to reject a bid based on strict adherence to tender specifications and proper evaluation procedures, affirming compliance with Article 14 of the Constitutio....
Tender evaluation processes must be respected and not interfered with unless there is clear evidence of arbitrary or irrational decision-making by the contracting authority.
Judicial review in tender matters is limited to preventing arbitrariness; courts should defer to the authority's interpretation of tender documents unless clear malafides or perversity are present.
The court emphasized the limited scope of judicial review in tender matters, the importance of punctilious and rigid enforcement of tender terms, and the uniform application of tender requirements to....
Judicial review of tender conditions is limited; courts should not interfere unless actions are arbitrary, discriminatory, or mala fide, ensuring public interest is prioritized.
The decision of the employer in interpreting the conditions of eligibility in a tender document must be respected unless it is shown to be arbitrary, outrageous, and highly unreasonable.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.