Back
SUJOY PAUL, SHAILENDRA SHUKLA
Shubham Parmar Electrical and Civil Construction Company – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER :
Sujoy Paul, J.
1. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assails the order dated 22.09.2020, whereby the petitioner's bid was rejected.
2. The admitted facts between the parties are that petitioner along with other bidders submitted their bid pursuant to NIT No. 25/2020-21 dated 04.09.2020. The petitioner's bid was lowest. Being L-1 petitioner expected the contract but same was rejected by stating twin reasons namely-(i) the rates quoted by the petitioner were comparatively higher and (ii) the tender was issued for the first time.
3. Criticizing the said order, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is arbitrary and unreasonable in nature. As per Clause-14 of Appendix-2.10 (conditions of contract), the only parameter is that rate quoted by L-1 should not be below 15% otherwise it shall be treated as unworkable rate. The rate quoted by the petitioner was admittedly above the said percent. The respondents have allotted similar contract to certain contractors who have quoted rates more than the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner was subjected to discrimination. Reliance is placed on (2014) 3 SCC 760, (Maa Binda Express Carrier
The judgment emphasizes the parameters for judicial review in contractual matters and the factors that make an impugned order subject to interference.
Tender evaluation must adhere strictly to the established criteria, and rejection based on erroneous interpretations undermines fairness and legality in public procurement processes.
The court ruled that bids below the justified rate are non-responsive, emphasizing judicial respect for expert evaluations in tendering processes.
Point of Law : Where the parties had executed lease deeds incorporating therein the rights, liabilities and obligations of the parties inter se, in the case in hand, the parties had not entered into ....
Cancellation of tender where L-1 bid within 5% limit, suspecting cartel without evidence, and inconsistent with prior awards exceeding limit, held arbitrary, violative of Article 14 warranting judici....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the decision making process in contractual matters can be reviewed if it is shown to be arbitrary, unreasonable, or if it violates the Wednesb....
The rejection of bids by public authorities must adhere to the principles of fairness, reasonableness, and non-arbitrariness as mandated by Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
The cancellation of a bid for any reason cannot be questioned unless there is mala fide on the part of the State or its agencies.
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
