IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
Ranjit Baruah, Son of Late Purendra Nath Baruah Proprietor of M/s Ranjit Baruah – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of tender process. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments regarding arbitrariness in tender process. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. court's observations on the decision-making process. (Para 15 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 39 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58) |
| 4. conclusion directing finalization of third tender. (Para 60 , 61 , 62 , 63) |
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. S. Sarma, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Gautam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State respondent.
2. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is assailing the notice inviting for re-tender (e-Tender) No.MCH/2024/948 dated 09.01.2024 for providing annual job contract of Dietary Service to the patient admitted to Assam Medical College Hospital, Dibrugarh issued by the Superintendent, Assam Medical College Hospital, Dibrugarh.
3. The brief facts of the case are that pursuant to a notice inviting for e-Tender through t
Ajantha industries Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes
C.B. Gautam Vs. Union of India
Dipak Babaria Vs. State of Gujarat
Assam Company India Ltd. Vs. Bank of New York Mellon London
Ramchandra Murarilal Bhatted & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Master Marine Services (P) Ltd. Vs. Metcalfe & Hodgkinson (P) Ltd. & Anr.
Jagdish Mandal Vs. State of Orissa & Ors.
Silppi Constructions Contractors Vs. Union of India & Anr.
Tata Cellular Vs. Union of India
Union of India and Ors. Vs Dinesh Engineering Corporation and Anr.
The court emphasized the necessity for transparency in public procurement processes, ruling that arbitrary actions in tender decisions violate procedural fairness and statutory requirements.
Section 14 of Act reads as general rejection of tenders.
Point of law: Tender/Contract – Judicial Review - Equal opportunity granted to all technically qualified bides – No question of violation of fundamental rights.
Tender modifications must be communicated properly to ensure fairness; arbitrary cancellation violates constitutional rights.
Judicial review in public procurement is limited; courts refrain from interference unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or bad faith is established.
public authorities must be left with the same liberty as they have in framing the policies - Contracts are legally binding commitments and they commit the authority which may be held to be a State wi....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.