The court upheld the automatic debarment of allied firms based on the disqualification of one firm, confirming no violation of natural justice occurred.

JUDGMENT :

DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, C.J.

1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the records available before us on these writ petitions. Since the subject matter of these writ petitions are intertwined, they were heard together and are being decided by the common judgment which follows:

2. The petitioner M/s. TPF Engineering Pvt Ltd. in all these writ petitions is the same, which for the sake of convenience, shall be referred hereinafter as the petitioner. The petitioner is a registered company primarily engaged in the business of construction of roads and bridges, and admittedly, it has been and is a part of a global conglomerate, namely, M/s TPF SA.

SUBJECT MATTER AND CHALLENGE IN EACH WRIT PETITION 

W.P.(C.) No. 813/ 2025

3. In August 2023, the respondent No.1/ National Highways Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as "NHAI’) issued a Request for Proposal (hereinafter referred to as "RFP’) for providing Consultancy Services for Authority Engineer for Rehabilitation and Upgradation to Four Lanning of NH-31D from Km./Ch. 83+340 to Km./Ch.113+200 (Package-II B) of Dhupguri to Falakata Section in the State of West Bengal on EPC Mode. The said RFP, which engages the attention of this Court in this writ petition bears Tender ID: 2023_NHAI_164355_1.

4. Under challenge in this writ petition is the communication dated 14.01.2025, whereby the bid of the petitioner was adjudged as disqualified from participating in any bidding process for Consultancy Services. The reason for such disqualification is given in the communication dated 14.01.2025, which is as under:

5. It is this decision of the respondent No.1 whereby the petitioner was declared disqualified in technical evaluation of its bidding which is under challenge herein.

6. Another prayer made in the writ petition is that the respondents be directed to consider the petitioner as a responsive bidder in the technical evaluation.

W.P.(C.) No. 814/ 2025

7. The petitioner has instituted this writ petition challenging the communication dated 08.01.2025 made by the respondent No.1/ NHAI whereby its bid submitted in response to the RFP issued in October 2024, for Authority Engineer Services for Balance Works for Six Lanning of Sriperumbudur to Karapettai Section of NH-4 (New NH-48) from Km 37+000 (Existing Km 37+000) to Km 71 +015 (Existing Km 71 +000) in Tamil Nadu on EPC Mode, has been declared to be non-responsive for the reason contained in the said communication itself. The RFP, which is the subject matter of this writ petition, bears Tender ID: 2024_NHAI_212092_1. The reason for declaring the petitioner‟s bid as non-responsive is communicated in the communication dated 08.01.2025 itself, which is as under:

8. It is also to be noticed that the petitioner‟s participation in the subject bid was as a Joint Venture (JV) partner with M/s MSV International, Inc.

9. Apart from challenging the decision of the respondent No.1 declaring the petitioner‟s bid as non-responsive, the other prayer made in the petition is for issuing a direction to the respondent No.1 to consider the petitioner as responsive in the technical evaluation.

W.P.(C.) No.