Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
E To E Transportation Infrastructure Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner’s status and bid details. (Para 1) |
| 2. claims of arbitrary disqualification. (Para 2) |
| 3. respondent's justification for disqualification. (Para 3) |
| 4. examination of procedural reasoning. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 5. court's need for fairness in evaluation. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 6. supreme court guidelines on procurement. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 7. ruling in favor of the petitioner. (Para 13) |
| 8. directions for further evaluation. (Para 14) |
ORDER:
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J.
Petitioner, a company registered under the COMPANIES ACT , 2013 and classified as an MSME under Registration ID UDYAM-KR-03-0046748, is engaged in major railway infrastructure works and executed various projects for Indian Railways including Respondent’s zone. It is contended that disqualification of its bid for Tender No. CSGC 365399 dated 07 February 2025 for works under South Central Railway, is impermissible under the tender terms and conditions, and that disqualification was issued through a non-speaking order on the IREPS portal stating only “not fulfilled eligibility criteria” without any opportunity of being heard. Petitioner alleges mala fides and bias in view of past acceptance of identical documents by the
Public procurement processes must adhere to principles of transparency, fairness, and natural justice, especially in communicating reasons for bid disqualifications.
The court affirmed that adherence to tender conditions is mandatory, and disqualification for non-compliance does not violate principles of natural justice.
Public authorities must ensure fairness and non-arbitrariness in tender processes, adhering to established eligibility criteria.
A change of name of a registered entity does not affect its legal existence, but failure to register correctly can invalidate tender submissions. Courts limit interventions in tender processes unless....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the conduct of the tendering authority, including the introduction of substantive terms through corrigendum and biased disqualification proces....
The court upheld the authority's discretion in evaluating tender bids, emphasizing the need for compliance with mandatory conditions and the absence of arbitrariness in disqualification decisions.
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
