Back
KALYAN RAI SURANA
Bamang Pacho, proprietor of M/s. Pacho Enterprises, S/o. Shri Bamang Tabang – Appellant
Versus
State of A. P. , represented by the Chief Secretary, Govt of A. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. T. Taba, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. P. Pangu, learned Government Advocate for the respondent no. 1 and Mr. B. Picha, learned Standing counsel for the Rural Works Department, representing the respondent nos. 2 to 7 as well as Ms. N. Danggen, learned counsel for the respondent no. 8.
2. The petitioner and the respondent no. 8 had both participated in the NIT/IOB, published on 21.08.2023 for supply and procurement of materials pertaining to MGNREGA works-2023-24 for CD Block, Polosang under Kurung Kumey District being, Package No. VIII. The said tender was issued by the Office of the Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, Koloriang, Kurung Kumey District. As per the comparative statements of the tabulation, the firm of the petitioner, namely, M/s. Pacho Enterprise had submitted a bid amount of Rs. 1,45,11,061.00/-, and was adjudged as L1 bidder. The NIT amount was Rs. 1,61,24,194/-. Accordingly, the bid quoted by the petitioner was (-) 10.00443 % less than the NIT amount. The respondent no. 8 i.e. M/s. N. K. Enterprise had quoted the bid amount of Rs. 1,41,89,286/- which was (-) 12.00003% less than the NIT amount and according
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the authority approving tenders must act within the scope of their authority and provide justifiable reasons for their decisions, especially i....
The court emphasized that the award of contracts should be in public interest and not interfered with unless there is evidence of malafide or irrationality.
An unsuccessful bidder lacks standing to challenge the issuance of a Letter of Intent when disqualified for failing to meet mandatory requirements.
The court ruled that bids below the justified rate are non-responsive, emphasizing judicial respect for expert evaluations in tendering processes.
An unsuccessful bidder cannot challenge the award of a tender if disqualified in the technical evaluation, as they lack standing to do so.
Tender evaluation must adhere strictly to the established criteria, and rejection based on erroneous interpretations undermines fairness and legality in public procurement processes.
Judicial intervention in tender processes is limited to cases of clear procedural violations or arbitrariness, emphasizing the importance of transparency and adherence to established norms.
The importance of full and fair disclosure of all material facts when invoking the court's jurisdiction, and the consequences of suppressing material facts in a writ petition.
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
