Back
SANJAY V. GANGAPURWALA, BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd (TANGEDCO) – Appellant
Versus
EFICAA Ensmart Solutions Private Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay V. Gangapurwala, J.
[Prayer in W.A.No.180 of 2024: Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 4.1.2024 made in W.P.No.28719 of 2023 by the learned Single Judge. and batch cases.]
All these appeals stem up from the common judgment and order delivered by the learned Single Judge dated 4.1.2024. The appeals are based on similar set of facts and involve common question of law and, as such, to avoid rigmarole, are decided by the common judgment.
2. The Ministry of Power, Government of India, launched Revamped Distribution Sector Scheme (RDSS) and issued the operational guidelines for implementation of Smart Metering as one of its components for States Pan-India. The present appellants, on or about 18.8.2023, floated a tender for appointment of Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) Service Provider for Smart Prepaid Metering and Smart System Metering in the appellant/TANGEDCO on Design, Build, Finance, Own, Operate and Transfer (DBFOOT) basis under RDSS through global open tender.
3. Clause 20.1 of the tender document provided for the third stage – reverse bidding. The electronic reverse option shall be conducted on the Network Interface Card (N
The authority has discretion in formulating tender terms and criteria, and the e-reverse auction process is not violative of the Act 1998 and the Rules 2000.
Judicial review of tender conditions is limited; courts should not interfere unless actions are arbitrary, discriminatory, or mala fide, ensuring public interest is prioritized.
Judicial review in public procurement is limited; courts refrain from interference unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or bad faith is established.
Judicial review in tender matters is limited; courts should not interfere unless actions are arbitrary, discriminatory, or biased.
The tendering process must adhere strictly to statutory rules, particularly when it comes to valid bidders and quotation limits.
Judicial interference in the matter of tenders and contracts is limited and the court should exercise restraint in interfering with the administrative decision-making process.
The cancellation of a tender by an authority after the bidding process is complete is arbitrary unless supported by clear, substantiated justifications, reaffirming the need for transparency and fair....
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
