Back
MITALI THAKURIA
Gichik Tami (Proprietor of M/s G. T. Enterprises), S/o Late Gichik Takkar – Appellant
Versus
State of Arunachal Pradesh, represented by the Chief Secretary, Govt. of A. P. , Itanagar – Respondent
JUDGMENT & ORDER :
Heard Mr. T. Taba, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. P. Pangu, learned Government Advocate for the respondent No.1; Mr. B. Picha, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 to 7 and Mr. D. Mazumdar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. T. Garam, learned counsel for the respondent No.8.
2. This application is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari or Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction.
3. The brief facts of the case is that; the petitioner is the proprietor of a firm, namely M/S G.T. Enterprises, having its registered office at Dokum Colony, P.O. & P.S. Itanagar, Dist. Papum Pare, Arunachal Pradesh. It is categorized as a civil firm enlisted under the provisions of the Arunachal Pradesh Enlistment of Contractors in Works Department Rules, 2008, to engage in the business of supply and construction. Respondent No. 5 issued a notice inviting tender dated 11.08.2023 for the supply and procurement of materials pertaining to MGNREGA works 2023-24 for CD Block Sarli under Kurung Kumey District. The estimated cost for the work, as stated in the NIT, was Rs. 2
An unsuccessful bidder cannot challenge the award of a tender if disqualified in the technical evaluation, as they lack standing to do so.
An unsuccessful bidder lacks standing to challenge the issuance of a Letter of Intent when disqualified for failing to meet mandatory requirements.
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.
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 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.
Tender authorities must adhere to statutory criteria and act transparently; courts will not interfere unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or malafide conduct is presented.
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
