Disclosure of reasons for tender bid rejection is only required after the award of the tender, upholding confidentiality in the evaluation process.

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 for which the company has been incorporated include the construction of roads, national highways express ways, elevated corridors, bridges and tunnels, long term contracts pertaining to Build operate transfer (BOT) road projects, urban infrastructure works irrigation projects, Irrigation projects, metro rail viaducts, Airport facilities and mining. The petitioner in their affidavit have set out some of the projects completed by them which includes Gorakpur link Expressway, Bangalore-Nidagatta Six-laning (Road Expansion), Chandikhole-Bhadrak Six Laning (Road rehabilitation and upgrade), Yavatmal-Wardha & Mahagaon Yavatman (Four Laning National Highways) etc.

2.2. The petitioner would submit that the 2nd respondent had vide tender notice No. 02/TANSHA/ECR-EC/2025 dated 25.08.2026 invited bids for the construction of Four Lane Elevated Corridor along East Coast Road (ECR) Chennai starting from Thiruvanmiyur to Uthandi and for widening of Carriageway to six lanes with paved shoulder along with covered drain cum foothpath on either side of the road from 11/800 to 13/615 of the project Corridor.

2.3. As per the Request for Proposal (RFP) issued by the authority dated 25.08.2025, Clauses 1.1.3 and 1.1.4 provide the broad scope of the work intended. As per Clause 1.2 of the RFP the bid process was a single stage two envelope process. In the first envelop, the RFP provides that the eligibility and qualification of the bidder would be examined (Technical bid) and once the respondents find the Technical bid to be responsive, the 2nd envelop (Financial bid) would be opened and the lowest bidder would be selected by the Authority. However, the bidders were directed to submit their technical as well as the financial bid on the date of submission of the bid. Originally, the bids were to be submitted on or before 23.10.2025 and later extended to 06.11.2025, 12.11.2025 and ultimately to 17.11.2025.

2.4. The petitioner would submit that as per Clause 2.2.2 of RFP the technical requirement was that the bidder should have completed at least one tangible project in the last 10 years financial years preceding the due date with a project cost of Rs.300 crores. The RFP further describes the eligible projects as Highways, Bridges, Elevated Corridors, Road over bridges (ROBs), Flyovers, Elevated Metros etc;. The financial capacity stipulated under the said Clause requires that the bidder should have a minimum net worth of Rs.300 crores at the close of the preceding financial year and a turnover of Rs.1,000 crores in the last three financial years preceding the bid due date. The petitioner would submit that they satisfied the above criteria.

2.5. It is their case that as per Clause 2.11 of RFP, the petitioner company had submitted all the documents for the Technical as well as Fi