Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.T.ASHA
Dilip Buildcop Limited Rep. By Authorised Signatory – Appellant
Versus
State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By Secretary To The Government, Highways And Minor Ports Department – Respondent
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for the following relief:-
“calling for the records of order of the 3rd respondent dated 24.12.2025 made in respect of Evaluation of Technical and Financial capacity of bidders in Tender Ref.No.T.N.02/TANSHA/ECR-EC/2025 & Tender Id.No.2025_TNSHA_598198_1 dated 25.08.2025 and consequential order dated 29.12.2025 made with respect to Evaluation Report of Financial bid in Tender Ref.No.T.N.02/TANSHA/ECR-EC/2025 & Tender Id.No.2025_TNSHA_598198_1 dated 25.08.2025 and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents 1 to 3 herein to reconsider the Technical bidof the petitioner for Tender Ref.No.T.N.02/TANSHA/ECR-EC/2025 & Tender Id.No.2025_TNSHA_598198_1 dated 25.08.2025.”
2. The brief facts which have given rise to the above Writ Petition, as stated by the petitioner in their affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition are set out hereunder:
2.1. The petitioner would contend that they are a reputed infrastructure development and construction company established in the year 1987. It is their contention that they have undertaken and executed both Government as well as Private Sector projects across various segments. The main objectives
Disclosure of reasons for tender bid rejection is only required after the award of the tender, upholding confidentiality in the evaluation process.
Judicial review in tender matters limited to arbitrariness or mala fides; courts defer to authority's bid compliance assessment, refusing substitution unless perverse.
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 is limited; courts should not interfere unless there is clear evidence of arbitrariness or mala fide conduct.
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.
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.
Tender authorities must adhere to statutory criteria and act transparently; courts will not interfere unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or malafide conduct is presented.
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
