SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Aero Globe Facility - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 17790 of 2022 and CM Appls. 56837 of 2022, 56838 of 2022 and 56839 of 2022
Decided On : 04-01-2023




Bidders must strictly adhere to stipulated financial eligibility criteria in tenders; altering bids after submission undermines the integrity of the bidding process.

Headnote:(A) Request for Proposal (RFP) - Eligibility Conditions - The petitioners, a consortium of ground handling agents, challenged the rejection of their technical bids and non-consideration of financial bids for services at several airports, citing compliance with the financial eligibility requirements outlined in RFP Clause 2.2.2. - The court found that clubbing turnover from different years was not permissible and that the petitioners' method of determining required turnover was irrational and contrary to tender conditions (Paras 8, 17, 18).

(B) Tendering Process - The sanctity of submitted bids must be maintained, and changes to bids after submission cannot be permitted (Para 18).

Facts of the case:
The petitioners formed a consortium to bid for ground handling services at eight airports but were disqualified due to non-compliance with financial capacity requirements. They later requested to delete one airport from their bid, which was not accepted by the authorities.

Findings of Court:
The stand of the respondents was not liable to be interfered with, as the petitioners did not comply with the stipulated eligibility criteria for the financial bids.

Issues: The court addressed whether the petitioners met the turnover requirements and if alterations to their bid post-submission were permissible.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioners’ approach to calculating eligibility was untenable, emphasizing the importance of adhering to specified tender conditions to maintain fairness in the bidding process.

Result: Stay application dismissed; notice issued in writ petition.

Table of Content
1. eligibility of bidders and rfp conditions. (Para 2 , 4 , 6 , 8)
2. arguments for reconsideration of bids. (Para 3 , 13 , 14)
3. clarifications on bid evaluation. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. interpretation of financial capacity criteria. (Para 16 , 17)
5. order for listing and interim relief notice. (Para 19 , 20 , 21)

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioners which are Ground Handling Agents and have been providing `Ground Handling Services' at various airports in the country. The Petitioners are part of a Consortium, with Petitioner No.1 - Aero-Globe Facility Management as the lead member having 51% share, Petitioner No.2 - Sri Sai Sampat Aviation Handling Service having 26% share, and Petitioner No.3 - Airclub Aviation Private Limited having 23% share in the Consortium.

3. The Petitioners have preferred the present petition challenging the rejection of their Technical bids and non-consideration of their Financial bids for Ground-Handling Services in respect of multiple airports of the Respondents - AAI. The prayers sought in the present petition are extracted below:

    "It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:-

    i) Pass appropriate writ, Certitiori, direction, order quashing orders of the Respondent authorities dated 12.12.2022 and 14.12.2022 disqualifying the Technical bids and not considering the Financial bid of the petitioners' consortium submitted in respect of eight airports of Bikaner, Gorakhpur, Gwalior, Hindon, Jaisalmer, Kanpur (Chakeri), Prayagraj (Allahabad) & Jamnagar in RFP Tender ld 2022_AAI_131185_1

    ii) Pass appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari, direction, order quashing orders of the Respondent authorities dated 14.12.2022 declaring the selected H1 bidders for the eight airports of Bikaner, Gorakhpur, Gwalior, Hindon, Jaisalmer, Kanpur (Chakeri), Prayagraj (Allahabad) & Jamnagar in RFP Tender ld 2022_AAI 131185_1

    iii) Pass appropriate writ, mandamus, direction, order directing the respondents to consider the financial bids submitted by the petitioners Consortium in respect of 8 airports - Bikaner, Gorakhpur, Gwalior, Hind on, Jaisalmer, Kanpur (Chakeri), Prayagraj (Allahabad) & Jamnagar ;

    iv) Alternatively, Pass appropriate writ, mandamus, direction, order directing the respondents to consider the financial bids submitted by the petitioners Consortium in respect of at least seven airports Gorakhpur, Gwalior, Hindon, Jaisalmer, Kanpur (Chakeri), Prayagraj (Allahabad) & Jamnagar based on their own accepted summated Turnover of Petitioners at Rs 18 Crores ;

    v) Pass appropriate writ, direction, order directing the respondents to refrain from giving effect to the selection of bidders subsequent to declaration of H1 including issuance of Letter of Intent to Award(LOIA) Consortium in respect of eight airports- Bikaner, Gorakhpur, Gwalior, Hindon, Jaisalmer, Kanpur (Chakeri), Prayagraj (Allahabad) & Jamnagar.

    vi) Alternatively, Pass appropriate writ, direction, order directing the respondents to ask the declared H1 bidder/other bidders to at least match the MAG quoted by the petitioner consortium in respect of the airports in public interest where the Financial Bids submitted by the petitioners consortium is higher than the H1 amount of the Selected bidder.

    vii) Pass such other direction/order as is deemed fit and proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case."

4. The background of the case is that, on 6th October, 2022, the Respondent No.2 - Airport Authority of India floated a Request for Proposal ("RFP") seeking bids for Ground Handling Services at 20 AAI Group D Airports, vide Tender ID:2022_AAI_131185_1. The bid submission due date and time was specified as 4th November, 2022. A `bidder', for the purposes of the said tender, could be a single entity or a consortium comprising of a maximum of three entities.

5. The r

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top