Back
SANDEEP MEHTA, SOUMITRA SAIKIA
Rana Construction and Engineer Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Represented by the Secretary – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP MEHTA, J.
1. These 4(four) intra-Court writ appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 07.02.2023 whereby, WP (C) No. 5294/2022; WP (C) No. 5297/2022; WP (C) No. 5298/2022 and WP (C) No. 5301/2022 preferred by the writ petitioners/appellants were dismissed. As these appeals involve identical issues of facts, they are being heard and decided together.
2. The appellant herein submitted separate bids in pursuance of a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) dated 08.04.2022 issued by the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department (PWD) for construction of 155 roads under Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY). The appellant’s bids were accepted for the following packages as the price quoted by the appellant was found to be the lowest:
Name of the work - upgradation of roads from T04-Abhyapuri Pachnia Road including cross drainage works and routine maintenance of the works for five years under Package No. AS-02-187, PMGSY-III, Batch-1, 2022-23.
Letter of Acceptance dated - 06.08.2022
Contract price - Rs. 10,22,40,436/-
Performance Security - Rs. 25,57,000/-
Additional Performance Security - Rs. 3,78,64,000/-
WP (C)/5297/2022
Name of the work - upgrad
The decision to award a tender contract must be arrived at after objective consideration and evaluation and cannot be interfered with if not found to be arbitrary, malafide, irrational, unreasonable,....
The court emphasized the importance of the respondents providing a clear basis for their claims and considering the petitioner's submissions in compliance with the previous court direction.
Point of Law : Deviation in the NIT resorted to by the State was arbitrary and therefore colourable, the appellants are at liberty to pursue other legal remedies, before any appropriate forum of law,....
In tender matters, judicial review is limited; courts defer to tender authority's bid responsiveness assessment unless arbitrary, mala fide or perverse, prioritizing public interest in infrastructure....
Judicial review in tender matters limited to arbitrariness or mala fides; courts defer to authority's bid compliance assessment, refusing substitution unless perverse.
The court ruled that bids below the justified rate are non-responsive, emphasizing judicial respect for expert evaluations in tendering processes.
The court upheld the award of a contract based on public interest considerations, affirming that deviations from tender procedures do not necessarily invalidate the process if no responsive competito....
Rounding off of financial bids in tender processes is permissible and does not invalidate the tender, even if one bid is marginally below the threshold set by guidelines.
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
