Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Universal Transport Agency – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam, Represented by the Additional Chief Secretary, Ministry of Food – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's complaint regarding bid rejection. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. grounds for rejection and extension of contract. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. arguments against the petitioner's standing. (Para 8 , 14) |
| 4. court's reasoning regarding contract viability. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. dismissal of the petition with observations. (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT :
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Heard Mr. M. Nath, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. D. J. Kapil, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. K. Gogoi, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Mr. J. Chutia, the learned Standing Counsel of the Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council (KAAC) appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.4 to 5.
2. The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the rejection of its technical bid in the Minutes of the Meeting held on 25.08.2025 as well as the granting of the contract to the private respondents.
3. The brief facts of the instant case are that the petitioner was awarded a contract for transportation of rice under NFSA, 2013 within the Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council area for the financial year 2019-2020 for Tier 1 and Tier 2. The petiti
Court held the rejection of the technical bid improper but denied relief due to petitioner's delay in seeking intervention and its acknowledgment of financial unviability.
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.
Bidders must provide complete and accurate documentation as required by tender specifications, and courts should exercise restraint in reviewing decisions made by tender authorities unless there is c....
Tender authorities have broad discretion in evaluating bids, and a failure to comply with mandatory document submission requirements justifies disqualification unless clear malice is shown.
Public authorities must ensure fairness and non-arbitrariness in tender processes, adhering to established eligibility criteria.
An unsuccessful bidder lacks standing to challenge the issuance of a Letter of Intent when disqualified for failing to meet mandatory requirements.
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
