Back
MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, N. MALA
Brandmidas Hospitality & Aviation Services (P) Ltd. Rep. by its Director N. Preetham Chengappa – Appellant
Versus
Airports Authority of India Rep. by its Airport Director Chennai Airport Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 07.12.2021 made in W.P.No.35845 of 2019.)
Munishwar Nath Bhandari, CJ
By this writ appeal, a challenge is made to the order dated 07.12.2021, by which, the writ petition preferred by the writ appellant was dismissed.
2. The writ petition was filed to challenge the order dated 10.12.2019 rejecting the technical bid of the writ appellant. The tender was invited by the first respondent for the grant of license for Smoking Lounge and Sale Kiosk at the Chennai Airport. Pursuant to the e-tender floated by the first respondent, the writ appellant, apart from the second respondent, submitted its technical bid. After the receipt of the tender documents from both the parties, the writ appellant was declared to be technically disqualified as it failed to submit no due certificate of all the previous projects.
3. The rejection of the technical bid was despite the writ appellant having satisfied the eligibility criteria as per Clause 10 of the Notice inviting e-tenders. Clause 10 states that a company was required to have experience of operating at least 3 Smoking Lounges at Indian Airports / 5 Star Hotels /
Compliance with tender conditions and eligibility criteria is crucial in technical bid disqualification cases, and the scope of judicial review in such matters is limited.
Judicial review in tender matters is limited to assessing procedural fairness, not the merits of the tender conditions, which are determined by the tendering authority.
The court upheld the tendering authority's discretion in setting eligibility criteria, emphasizing limited judicial review focused on procedural fairness rather than the merits of the decision.
Technical bid non-responsive for missing mandatory physical affidavit; no evaluation or appeal period applies; limited judicial interference in tenders.
The limited scope of judicial review in tender matters and the importance of upholding essential NIT requirements.
Judicial review in tender matters limited to arbitrariness or mala fides; courts defer to authority's bid compliance assessment, refusing substitution unless perverse.
The person claiming justice and equity must come with clean hands.
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
