The tender accepting authority may cancel bids without stated reasons and has discretion in evaluating tenders based on competitive pricing, as upheld by the court.

ORDER :

P.T. ASHA, J.

W.P.No.47323 of 2025 has been filed for the following relief :

“To issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 2^nd respondent, relating to the notification dated 04.11.2025 bearing No.NIT CMAML/CP/TDR-50-CON/2025 discharging the tender related to “Design and construction of Civil, Structural, Architecture, MEP, HVAC, Lifts, Landscaping and all Associated Works for establishment of Integrated Bus Terminal Cum Commercial / Office development at Vadapalani Bus Depot and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to accept the petitioner’s bid dated 30.07.2025 and award the contract for the “Design and Construction of Civil, Structural Architecture, MEP, HVAC, Lifts, Landscaping and all Associated Woks for establishment of Integrated Bus Terminal cum Commercial / office development at Vadapalani Bus Depot” to the petitioner herein.

W.P.No.47327 of 2025 has been filed for the following relief:

“To issue a Writ of Certiorari Mandamus, calling for the records of the 2^nd respondent relating to the Tender Notice dated 05.11.2025 bearing no NIT No.CMAML/CP/ TDR- 10 -CS- DDC/ 2025 towards “Detailed Design of Integrated Bus Terminal cum Commercial/Office Development at Vadapalani Bus Depot” and quash the same.”

2. Considering the fact that the genesis for both the writ petitions are one and the same, a common order is being pronounced.

3. Factual Matrix The factual matrix giving rise to the above writ petitions are as follows:-

(i) On 29.05.2025, the 2^nd respondent had invited tenders for a project which is titled “Design and Construction of Civil, Structural, Architecture, MEP, HVAC, Lifts, Landscaping and all Associated Works for the establishment of Integrated Bus Terminal Cum Commercial / Office development at Vadapalani Bus Depot”. The last date for submission of the bids was 30.07.2025. The contract in question was a “Turn-key” or in other words a “design and build” contract, placing the entire responsibility on the tenderer starting from the detailed investigation and design up to the construction and commissioning. Since this was a “lump-sum” tender, persons bidding were required to possess significant resources.

(ii) It is the case of the petitioner that they had submitted a bid on 30.07.2025. The petitioner qualified for the technical bid and after the opening of the price bid, they were declared the lowest bidder at a sum of Rs.5.18 crores, which was 6.95% lower than lowest bidder(L2). Thereafter, a series of four meetings were held between the petitioner and the respondents. On 14.10.2025 and 17.10.2025, the 1^st respondent had called the petitioner for negotiations and to submit their important credentials. In the first of these meetings held on 16.10.2025, the respondents had requested the petitioner to offer discounts and the petitioner had offered a discount of 1.50% in total subject to the condition that a discount of 0.75% would be granted if land is provided for the workers’ inside the campus and the remaining 0.75% if land for a batching plant was provided within the campus. The 2^nd negotiation was held on 22.10.2025, during which further reductions were discussed and the petitioner had informed the respondents that the contract value quoted by them was lower than the value based on CPWD DPAR and the petitioner's original estimate.

(iii) It is the case of the petitioner that during these negotiations, the respondents had repeatedly requested the petitioner to share commercially sensitive and proprietary data. Though these details were the petitioner’s exclusive Intellectual Property, the petitioner, on the belief