HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SARAL SRIVASTAVA, AMITABH KUMAR RAI, JJ.
M/s Maha Shakti Traders and Another – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. and Others – Respondents
Writ (C) No. 10032 of 2022
Decided On : 17-11-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background facts related to the tender process (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 2. arguments regarding payment entitlement due to work completed (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. court's reasoning on the denial of payment and arbitrariness (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. final decision to allow the writ petition for payment (Para 21) |
JUDGMENT :
AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Heard Ms. Saumya Mandhyan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Krishna Dutt Mishra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
2. The instant writ petition has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:-
"(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order and judgment dated 20.01.2016 passed by the Respondent No. 2 so far as it concerns the Petitioner No. 1, being arbitrary, whimsical and bad in law;
(ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release the amount of Rs. 59,62,135/- for the tender work of Sewer Construction (Nala Nirman) from Soron Gate Police Chowki to Allahnoor Saifi's Shop to the petitioners;
(iii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release the amount of Rs. 2,22,000/- for the tender work of supply of clamps with nut bolt to the petitioners;"
3. The brief facts of the case are that tenders were invited by the Nagar Palika Parishad, Kasganj for 41 categories of works vide tender notification dated 4.8.2015. The petitioner’s firm in furtherance of the tender notification submitted bid for two tenders, one for construction of sewerage from Soron Gate Police Chowki to Allahnoor Saifi's Shop with bid amount of Rs.59,62,135/-. The bid of the petitioner’s firm was lowest, hence tender committee recommended for award of tender to the petitioner’s firm on 19.8.2015 which was accepted and the work order was issued. The petitioner’s firm also submitted bid for supply of clamps with nut bolts which was also accepted in favour of the petitioner’s firm. As per the tender invitation notice dated 4.8.2015, the work of sewerage construction was to be completed within two months and the supply of clamp was to be made within 15 days of the award of the tender. The supply order was issued by the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Kashganj for supply of the clamp along with nut bolts which is annexed at Page No. 47 of the writ petition and furtherance thereof petitioner’s firm supplied the quantity of clamps with nut bolts which was duly acknowledged and the receipt of such acknowledgment are collectively annexed as Annexure No.8 to the writ petition.
4. The acknowledgment indicates that the supply of the clamp along with nut bolts were made between the period 3.11.2015 to 24.11.2015. In the meantime, it seems that some complaint was made by one of the contractor which was inquired upon by the Additional District Magistrate, Kasganj who submitted its report dated 29.12.2015 and on the basis of the said inquiry report, order dated 20.1.2016 was passed by the District Magistrate, Kasganj cancelling the tender invitation notice dated 4.8.2015. In the meantime, the petitioner’s firm has already supplied the clamp along with nut bolts in reference to the tender invitation notice dated 4.8.2015 amounting to Rs.2,22,000/- and has also completed the construction of the sewerage up to 85 to 90 per cent.
5. It seems that thereafter a fresh tender notice was issued inviting tender with respect to the works which were also part of the notice inviting tender dated 4.8.2015, out of which many works already stood completed, hence a complaint was made and the Additional District Magistrate, Kasganj. In charge (Local Bodies) instituted inquiry vide letter dated 10.3.2016 by a team comprising of Tehsildar (Judicial), Kasganj, Executive Officer P.W.D., Kasganj, Executive Officer, Rural Engineering Department, Kasganj. The committee submitted its report on the basis of which the Additi
The court held that cancellation of a tender cannot disrupt the obligation to pay for work completed, establishing principles of equity and promissory estoppel in administrative actions.
A public authority's decision to cancel a tender must be reasoned and not arbitrary; failure to provide justifications exposes such decisions to judicial scrutiny.
Non-commencement of work allows for cancellation of administrative approvals under Article 226, ensuring public fund utilization.
Administrative decisions must be justified with reasons on record; arbitrary actions lacking justification violate principles of fairness and transparency.
Every decision of the State must be supported by reasons and cannot be arbitrary, whimsical, or capricious.
Condition of attending pre-bid meeting as prescribed in the public notice before the tender document was uploaded and was permitted to be downloaded, cannot be said to be arbitrary or mala fide.
The validity of administrative decisions must be judged on the basis of reasons existing on record, and the authority cannot provide new/additional reasons when the Court calls for them as they must ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.