2025 Supreme(MP) 498

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR 
 ANAND PATHAK, HIRDESH, JJ. 
Pragmatic Infrastructure Pvt Ltd., Through Director Pranvir Singh Kushwaha – Appellant 
Versus 
Madhya Pradesh Housing And Infrastructure Development Board And Others – Respondent 
WRIT PETITION No. 11842 of 2025 
Decided On : 16-10-2025

Headnote:

(1) Constitution of India -- Art. 226 -- scope of judicial review -- contract/tender -- grounds for interference -- illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety -- Court can review decisionmaker's evaluation of facts -- Court will intervene where facts taken as a whole could not logically warrant the conclusion of decision-maker. (1994) 6 SCC 651, (2007) 14 SCC 517, (1993) 1 SCC 445, (2007) 8 SCC 1 and AIR 2024 SC 3784 followed. [Para 41]

(2) Grah Nirman Mandal Adhiniyam, 1972 (M.P.) -- S. 23(3)

-- M.P. Housing and Infrastructure Development Board (Conduct of Business and Delegation of Powers) Regulations, 2015 -- Reg. 11(c)(iii) and 11(d) -- tender of more than Rs. 50 crore value -- Commissioner had no authority to accept or reject bid -- it was the domain of Business Committee, as per Reg. 11 (c)(iii) and (d) -- no document submitted by respondents to indicate that Business Committee took decision and thereafter Board confirmed it -- case suffers from illegality. [Para 45]

(3) Tender -- bid document contained pre-qualification criteria and special eligibility criteria -- later on, additional conditions incorporated by Corrigendum-2 -- Corrigendum-2 cancelled by Corrigendum3 and original NIT resorted to -- petitioner and another bidder stood qualified in technical bid -- on objection of a disqualified bidder, respondent No. 2 Additional Commissioner halted procedure and enquired -- objection not found relevant -- respondent No. 2 directed authorities to open financial bid -- petitioner was L-1 -- within 45 days, respondent No. 2 changed his stand and directed fresh bid -- this smacks of mischief on the part of respondent No. 2 -- process of bidding was not fairly conducted -- officers had to place the matter before Board as per S. 23 and Reg. 11 -- decision suffers from arbitrariness, irrationality and procedural impropriety -- Cl. 19.5 of bid document not so sacred or sacrosanct that in any eventuality it insulates the whole process of bid -- respondents have to be fair, transparent and honest in their approach -- in garb of such cloak, respondents cannot be permitted to carry out mischief -- impugned order directing fresh bid set aside -- matter relegated to Business Committee to consider proposal of petitioner as L-1 and place the matter before Board -- Board shall pass a reasoned order -- Board directed not to involve respondent No. 2 in whole process. (2010) 9 SCC 437 and (1994) 6 SCC 651 followed. 2021 (1) JLJ 582 = 2021 (3) MPLJ 111 relied on. (2022) 6 SCC 127, (2014) 11 SCC 288, (2015) 13 SCC 233 and (2023) 2 SCC 703 referred to. [Paras 47 to 55, 60 & 61]

(4) Tender -- by inviting tender, respondents become repository of public faith -- their conduct should be fair and transparent -- process is not only to be fair but it has to appear to be fair. [Para 54]

(5) Tender -- process aborted after completion of tender process and de novo process started -- shakes credibility of process -- prejudices development of entrepreneurship -- proliferates corruption, nepotism and crony-capitalism -- best bidder should prevail for wider public interest. [Para 56]

¼1½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 226 & U;kf;d iqufoZyksdu dh O;kfIr lafonk@fufonk & gLr{ksi ds vk/kkj & voS/krk] rdZ 'kwU;rk vkSj çfØ;kRed vukSfpR; & U;k;ky; }kjk fofu'p;drkZ ds rF;kRed ewY;kadu dk iqufoZyksdu fd;k tk ldrk gS & U;k;ky; ogk¡ e/;{ksi djsxk tgk¡ lexz rF;ksa ij fofu'p;drkZ ds fu"d"kZ dks rdZlaxr :i ls mfpr ugha Bgjk;k tk ldrkA ¼1994½ 6 ,llhlh 651] ¼2007½ 14 ,llhlh 517] ¼1993½ 1 ,llhlh 445] ¼2007½8 ,llhlh 1 rFkk ,vkbvkj 2024 ,llh 3784 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 41½

¼2½ x`g fuekZ.k eaMy vf/kfu;e] 1972 ¼eŒÁŒ½ & /kkjk 23¼3½ & eŒçŒ x`g fuekZ.k ,oa v/kkslajpuk fodkl eaMy ¼dkedkt dk lapkyu ,oa 'kfä;ksa dk çR;k;kstu½ fofu;e] 2015 & fofuŒ 11¼10½¼3½ rFkk 11¼?k½ & :i;s 50 djksM+ ls vfèkd ewY; dh fufonk & vk;qä dks cksyh Lohdkj ;k ukeatwj djus dk çkf/kdkj ugha Fkk & fofuŒ 11¼10½¼3½ vkSj 11¼?k½ ds vuqlkj ;g fctusl lfefr ds {ks=kfèkdkj esa Fkk & çR;FkhZx.k }kjk ;g minf'kZr djus ds fy, dksbZ nLrkost is'k ugha fd;k x;k fd fctusl lfefr us fofu'p; fd;k vkSj rnqijkar eaMy us mldh iqf"V dh & ekeyk voS/krk ls xzLr gSA ¼iSjk 45½

¼3½ fufonk & cksyh nLrkost esa iwoZ&vgZrk ds ekunaM vkSj fo'ks"k ik=rk ekunaM varfoZ"V Fks & ckn esa] 'kqf)&i= 2 }kjk vfrfjä 'krsZ lekfo"V dh xbZ & 'kqf)&i= 3 }kjk 'kqf)&i= 2 jn~n fd;k x;k rFkk ewy fufonk vkea=.k lwpuk dk vkJ; fy;k x;k & ;kph vkSj ,d vU; cksyh yxkus okyk rduhdh cksyh esa vgZ jgs & fujgZ cksyh yxkus okys dh vkifÙk ij çR;FkhZ Øekad 2 vij vk;qä us çfØ;k jksd nh vkSj tk¡p dh & vkifÙk lqlaxr ugha ikbZ xbZ & çR;FkhZ Øekad 2 us çkf/kdkjhx.k dks foÙkh; cksyh [kksyus dk funs'k fn;k & ;kph ,y&1 Fkk & 45 fnol ds Hkhrj çR;FkhZ Øekad 2 us vius fu.kZ; esa ifjorZu dj u, fljs ls cksyh dk funs'k fn;k & blls çR;FkhZ Øekad 2 }kjk fjf"V fd, tkus dh xa/k vkrh gS & cksyh dh çfØ;k fu"i{krk ls lapkfyr ugha dh xbZ & /kkjk 23 vkSj fofuŒ 11 ds vuqlkj vf/kdkfj;ksa dks ekeyk eaMy ds le{k j[kuk Fkk & fofu'p; euekuh] rdZ'kwU;rk vkSj çfØ;kRed vukSfpR; ls xzLr & cksyh nLrkost dk [kaM 19-5 bruk ikou vkSj ifo= ugha fd fdlh Hkh n'kk esa mlls cksyh dh laiw.kZ çfØ;k çfrjf{kr gks tk, & çR;FkhZx.k dk :[k fu"i{k] ikjn'khZ vkSj bZekunkj gksuk gksrk gS & bl os'k ds vkoj.k esa çR;FkhZx.k dks fjf"V djus ugha dh vuqKk ugha nh tk ldrh & u, fljs ls cksyh dk funs'k nsus dk vkf{kIr vkns'k vikLr & ,y&1 ds :i esa ;kph ds çLrko ij fopkj djus vkSj ekeyk eaMy ds le{k j[kus ds fy, çdj.k fctusl lfefr dks okil çsf"kr & eaMy ldkj.k vkns'k ikfjr djs & çR;FkhZ Øekad 2 dks laiw.kZ çfØ;k esa varoZfyr ugha djus dk eaMy dks funs'kA ¼2010½ 9 ,llhlh 437 rFkk ¼1994½ 6 ,llhlh 651 vuqlfjrA 2021 ¼1½ ts,yts 582 % 2021 ¼3½ ,e,yts 111 voyafcrA ¼2022½ 6 ,llhlh 127] ¼2014½ 11 ,llhlh 288] ¼2015½ 13 ,llhlh 233 rFkk ¼2023½ 2 ,llhlh 703 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 47 ls 55] 60 ,oa 61½

¼4½ fufonk & fufonk vkeaf=r dj çR;FkhZx.k yksd vkLFkk ds vk/kku cu tkrs gSa & mudk vkpj.k fu"i{k vkSj ikjn'khZ gksuk pkfg, & çfØ;k fu"i{k gksuk gh ugha] vfirq fu"i{k çrhr gksuk Hkh vko';d gSA ¼iSjk 54½

¼5½ fufonk & fufonk çfØ;k iw.kZ gksus ds i'pkr~ çfØ;k jn~n dj u, fljs ls çfØ;k vkjaHk dh xbZ çfØ;k dh fo'oluh;rk fgy tkrh gS & m|ferk ds fodkl ij çfrdwy çHkko iM+rk gS & Hkz"Vkpkj] ifjokjokn vkSj i{kikrh&iw¡thokn çQfyr gksrk gS & c`gÙkj yksd fgr esa loZJs"B cksyh yxkus okyk vfHkHkkoh gksuk pkfg,A ¼iSjk 56½

Order :

Anand Pathak, J.

1. With consent of parties, heard finally.

2. The present Writ Petition is preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :-

7.1 Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 18.03.2025 (annexure P-1) by the Respondent No.3.

7.2 Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus to reconsider the allotment of financial bid and proceed with acceptance of tender of the eligible/qualified lowest tenderer/petitioner.

7.3 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court finds appropriate in the matter may also be granted with Costs.

3. Precisely stated, facts of the case are that the petitioner is a registered company engaged in construction works. It is a registered contractor executing various government works. Respondent No.1 is a statutory body established under Section 3 of M.P. Grah Nirman Mandal Adhiniyam, 1972 (hereinafter shall be referred to as the “Adhiniyam). It is a body corporate having power to contract. Respondent No.1 is incorporated to perform public duty of providing housing accommodation to the public at large. It is fully funded by the State Government. It's Chairman and other officers are appointed by the State Government.

4. In exercise of powers conferred under Section 103 and Section 17 of the Adhiniyam, the Board has framed Conduct of Business and Delegation of Powers Regulations 2015 (hereinafter shall be referred to as the “Regulations). Annexure I of the Regulations prescribes powers delegated to the officers. Board of Directors or its empowered committee having full powers to approve Tenders on Percentage Rate Basis, whereas Chairman has full powers up to Rs. Fifty Crores. Housing Commissioner has full powers only up to Rs. Twenty Crores.

5. Dy. Housing Commissioner (respondent No.3 herein) published a notice inviting percentage rate tender in the newspapers from registered contractors for the work of construction of residential cum commercial complex - “Atal Kunj Tower” at Sector-A, Deen Dayal Nagar, Gwalior. Amount of contract as provided in the NIT dt.30.10.2024 was Rs.65.73 Crores. Detailed NIT prescribed in Clauses 4,5 and 6 Eligibility for Bidders. Pre-qualification Criteria, as per Annexure C and Special Eligibility Criteria, as per Annexure D, are reproduced as under :-

Annexure - C

(See clause 5 of Section 1-NIT)

PRE-QUALIFICATION CRITERIA

The bidder should have :

A. Financial

i. experience of having successfully executed :

a) three similar works, each costing not less than the amount equal to 20% of the probable amount of contract during the last 5 financial years; or

b) two similar works, each costing not less than the amount equal to 30% of the probable amount of contract during the last 5 financial years; or

c) one similar work of aggregate cost not less than the amount equal to 50% of the probable amount of contract in any one financial year during the last 5 financial years,

ii. Average annual construction turnover on the construction works not less than 50% of the probable amount of contract during the last 5 financial years.

iii. Executed similar items of work in any one financial year during the last 5 financial years, which should not be less than the minimum, physical requirement, if any, fixed for the work.

iv. Bid Capacity – Bidder shall be allotted work up to his available Bid Capacity, which shall be worked out as given in format I-2 of Annexure I.

Annexure - D

(See clause 6 of Section 1-NIT)

SPECIAL ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA The Bidder should have experience of :

1. The bidder should have experience for construction of more than 20 m high rise building, should produce certificate along with qualification documents for the same from the competent authority having rank not less than Executive Engineer.

2. The bidder should not have delayed his previous works not more than 6 months due to his own faults and should produce proof/certificate for the same duly signed by competent authority

Click Here to Read the rest of this document