Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Dhatarwal Construction Company Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
National Highway Authority of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition details and tender invocation (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. allegations of mala fide and procedural impropriety (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments against nhai's rejection reasonings (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. court's consideration of technical interpretation (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. judicial limits in contractual agreements (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. conclusion of the petition dismissal (Para 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT
Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, seeking the quashing of letter dated 14.09.2022 issued by the Respondent, i.e. National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), whereby the bid of the Petitioner was declared as non-responsive as per Clause 2.2.2 (i) of the Request for Proposal (RFP). The petition further prays for a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent to declare the Petitioner as technically qualified and for the Respondent to open the financial bid of the Petitioner.
2. The facts leading to the instant petition are as under:
a) It is stated on 07.02.2022, the Respondent invited tenders for Rehabilitation and Upgradation to Four-Lane Configuration and Strengthening of Thanpuri to Paror Section fro
The court upheld that the authority's interpretation of RFP criteria for bid evaluation is final, emphasizing that nomenclature of a project does not solely determine eligibility.
Essential tender eligibility criteria must be strictly complied with, and any deviation leads to arbitrary exercise of power, warranting judicial review.
The court emphasized the need for judicial restraint in interfering with tender processes, especially in matters involving technical issues, and highlighted the limitations of the court's expertise i....
The court emphasized the importance of fair and transparent decision-making in tender evaluations, asserting judicial review is warranted when actions of administrative bodies exhibit arbitrariness b....
The court upheld the authority's discretion in evaluating tender bids, emphasizing the need for compliance with mandatory conditions and the absence of arbitrariness in disqualification decisions.
Judicial review of tender processes is limited; courts should respect the authority's discretion unless there is clear evidence of arbitrariness or irrationality.
The eligibility for tender participation relies strictly on interpreted criteria by the issuer unless proven arbitrary or biased, excluding warranty periods from work experience.
Judicial review in tender matters is limited to assessing arbitrariness, irrationality, or mala fides; decisions should reflect fair competition and not accommodate late submissions of corrected bids....
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
