Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
RAJNESH OSWAL
Mohit Singh – Appellant
Versus
U.T. of J&K – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges emd amounts (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner’s experience in contracts (Para 2) |
| 3. petitioner claims arbitrary emds (Para 3) |
| 4. respondents argue against maintainability (Para 4) |
| 5. respondents explain emd fixation (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 6. court reviews emd calculation (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 17 , 18) |
| 7. court finds no arbitrariness (Para 16) |
| 8. writ petition dismissed (Para 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT :
2. The petitioner has stated that he has been participating in various Government contracts for the last more than 2 to 3 years and has been awarded various contracts by the Government. He further claims to have successfully completed the contracts allotted to him to the satisfaction of the Government. It is further stated that the fixation of the amount of EMDs of Rs. 13,23,945/- and Rs. 17,01,000/- for auctioning of both the aforesaid blocks 34/GJ and 37/J at Village Aghore and Village Taroti Jourian, Jammu respectively is contrary to Rule 55 of the Rules of 2016, as Rule 55 provides for earnest money not less than Rs. 1.50 lacs or 15% of the minimum bid amount whichever is higher in the shape of CDR pledged to Officer In-charge of the district. It is a
The court upheld the discretion of authorities in fixing EMD amounts for mineral auctions under amended rules, emphasizing limited judicial intervention in tender matters.
The court established that clarity in auction terms is essential, and the commencement of mining operations is contingent upon obtaining environmental clearance, as per the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Co....
The court affirmed that auction terms must provide legal certainty, and found no ambiguity in the terms of the e-auction for mining leases, thus upholding the auction process.
Presence of an arbitration clause would oust jurisdiction under Article 226.
E-auction – Mistake in bid – While undertaking exercise of judicial review of matters relating to tenders, court has to strike a fair balance between interests of Government, which is always expected....
A bidder cannot claim EMD refund due to an inadvertent error in a bid amount when sufficient safeguards exist in the bidding process to prevent such mistakes.
Authorities under Article 12 must ensure decisions reflect fairness and rationality, especially regarding individual circumstances such as health issues affecting compliance.
Section 2(b) of 2017 Act provides “bidder” means any person, company, firm, agency, institution, etc. participating in a procurement process of a procuring entity for procurement of any Goods, Works ....
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
