SURESH KUMAR KAIT, AND VIVEK JAIN
Maha Mineral Mining and Beneficiation Private Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Madhya Pradesh Power Generating Company Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER
Kait, C.J. -- 1. Petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking the following reliefs:--
"(a). Hold and declare that the impugned decision of the respondent dated 4.7.2024 (Annexure (Annexure-P/1) P/1) disqualifying the petitioner from Tender ID No.2024_MPPGC_341576_1, is arbitrary, capricious, and in violation of Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
(b) Hold and declare that the petitioner is technically qualified to participate in Tender ID No.2024_MPPGC_341576_1, as per the criteria criteria set out in the Notice Inviting Tender;
(c) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned decision of the respondent dated 04.07.2024, disqualifying the petitioner from Tender ID No.2024_MPPGC_ 341576_1;
(d) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the respondent to re re-evaluate evaluate the petitioner's technical bid in accordance with the tender criteria and in a fair and transparent manner;
(e) Grant ant any other relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present matter.
(f) Quash and set aside
The court upheld the validity of tender disqualification based on non-compliance with specified documentation requirements, affirming the decision-making integrity of the evaluation committee.
Bidders must comply strictly with tender requirements; misleading information and poor performance can result in disqualification. Judicial review in tender cases should maintain restraint, supportin....
The court emphasized strict compliance with tender conditions, ruling that the Local Content Certificate must be submitted in the name of the Joint Venture, and deviations from prescribed formats are....
Point of law: Court must exercise its discretionary power under Article 226 with great caution and should exercise it only in furtherance of public interest and not merely on the making out of a lega....
The court ruled that tender eligibility criteria must explicitly state disqualifications, allowing joint venture experience to be considered for bidder qualifications, ensuring clarity and fairness i....
Judicial review in tender matters is limited; disqualification must be based on clear, justifiable criteria, and actions must not display arbitrariness or bias.
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.
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.
Experience of a firm is not in its entirety attributable to each individual partner, but attributable only to the collective effort of all partners concerned.
The State must act validly for a discernible reason and not whimsically in matters of tender.
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.