Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6509

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sachin Datta, J
M/S HIGHWAY ENGINEERING CONSULTANT – Appellant
Versus
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ANR. – Respondent
W.P.(C) 9070/2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Nandadevi Deka, Ms. Arunabha Ganguli, Mr. Shashwat Pratyush, Ms. Shubhra Chandu Sharma, Mr. Rohan Chandra
For the Respondents: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi (CGSC), Ms. Himanshi Singh, Mr. Sainyam Bhardwaj, Ms. Monalisha Pradhan, Mr. Santosh Kumar (SC), Ms. Dhiritry Phookan, Ms. Nidhi Rani

The court emphasizes the necessity for adherence to interim judicial directives in bid processes and reassures compliance from the respondent to ensure fair treatment of bids.

Headnote:(A) Relevant to administrative law and contract. The order dated 07.07.2025 mandated adherence to terms that prevented the respondent from treating the petitioner as debarred or disqualified in ongoing bids, and the court's review emphasized compliance with prior court orders. (Para 1)

(B) The court acknowledged the petitioner as H-1 bidder in multiple tenders but also confirmed compliance issues and pending investigations impacted bid processing. (Paras 3-4)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged the NHAI's treatment of their bid status amidst ongoing suspensions and compliance with court orders related to their submissions. Abiding by previous orders was stressed to ensure fair bid execution.

Findings of Court:
The court noted there should be no unreasonable delays by the NHAI regarding bid processes and emphasized compliance with interim orders to prevent frustration of judicial directives.

Issues: The court addressed the compliance of bid evaluations and the execution of award letters post judicial review.

Ratio Decidendi: The ruling underscored the necessity for the NHAI to observe the directives in the order dated 07.07.2025 and the implications of non-compliance. This affirms that delays are not permitted that hinder fair bid treatment. (Para 6)

Result: The tenders remain under review with specific directives for urgency in processing the status of bids, with follow-up on the next hearing.

Table of Content
1. compliance with interim order to prevent disqualification. (Para 1)
2. petitioner emerges as h-1 bidder despite compliance issues. (Para 2 , 3)
3. court directs timely issuance of loas. (Para 4)

O R D E R

% 01.09.2025 CM APPL.49502/2025 (for directions)

1. In terms of the order dated 07.07.2025 read with order dated 28.07.2025, the respondent no.1 (NHAI) was interdicted from treating the petitioner as being under suspension/ disqualified for the purpose of any ongoing/ future bids (which had not been finalised or where letter of award had not been issued as of 28.07.2025).

2. It is the apprehension of the petitioner that the said directions are not being complied with. Attention is drawn to order dated 12.08.2025 particularly para-4 thereof which reads as under:-

“1. The present application has been filed by the petitioner seeking that the respondents should refrain from treating the petitioner as ‘debarred’

or ‘disqualified’. It is submitted that the same is mandated in terms of the order dated 07.07.2025, whereby suspension of the petitioner has been stayed.

2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 07.07.2025 is not being adhered to inasmuch as in ongoing tender processes, LOA has not been issued to the petitioner, despite the petitioner emerging as the H-1 bidder.

3. After some hearing, it is submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that in view of the order dated 07.07.2025, passed by this Court, the bids submitted by the petitioner (particularly the bids set out in the table incorporated in the present application) are to be treated as ‘responsive’ and not ‘non-responsive’. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the same is subject to the final report of the Expert Committee, and the final adjudication of the show cause notice dated 22.05.2025. However, it is not disputed that as on date, there is no occasion to treat the said bids of the petitioner as ‘non- responsive’.

4. Specific attention is drawn by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner to the fact that the petitioner has emerged as the H-1 bidder in respect of certain bids. The details thereof together with the ostensible reason for not issuing LoA to the petitioner has been set out in a tabular form, and has been handed over during the course of hearing. The same reads as under:-


S.N.	Name of Work	Date & Time	Address of Submission	Reason	Remark
1.	Independent Engineer services for Upgradation of Shahdol- Sagartola Section of NH 543 from km 0+000 to km 69+400 to Two lane with paved shoulder configuration on HAM mode in the State of Madhya Pradesh.	25- Nov- 24	Chief Engineer- Regional Office, MoRT&H, 2nd Floor, Nirman Bhawan, Arera Hills, Bhopal- 462011	Lead Member is debarred. Hence, rendered as Non- responsive as per Ministry’s circular no.RW/ NH- 33044/76/2021-S&R(P&B) dated 04.01.2022 read with clause 3.4(xvi) of LOI of RFP.	F W Final Evaluation dated 17.07.2025 inancial opened on 18.07.2025 e are H1 bidder waiting for issuing of LOA.
2.	Consultancy Services for preparation of	21- Apr- 25	Chief General Manager (Tech)/RO-	H-1 (subject to decision of competent authority of NHAI on reply to SCN of	Evaluation dated 04.06.2025

	Detailed Project Report for Bhopal-Jabalpur greenfield corridor (Part of Vision 2047) in the state of Madhya Pradesh.		Bhopal, National Highways Authority of India E-6/47, Smriti Parisar, Arera Colony, Bhopal	CGM(T), Kerala Division letter NHAI/12013/Ramnattukara- Valachery/2022 dated 22.05.2025 as per court order)	W e are H1 bidder but the authorities are not issuing LOA due to Suspension letter dated 22.05.2025 & 17.06.2025
3	Supervision Consultant for monitoring i. Construction of underpass as long term measures at km.305+640, km.307+630, km.339+100, km.345+300 & km.364+200 at the st

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6509

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHISachin Datta, JM/S HIGHWAY ENGINEERING CONSULTANT – AppellantVersusNATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ANR. – RespondentW.P.(C) 9070/2025

The court emphasizes the necessity for adherence to interim judicial directives in bid processes and reassures compliance from the respondent to ensure fair treatment of bids.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sachin Datta, J
M/S HIGHWAY ENGINEERING CONSULTANT – Appellant
Versus
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ANR. – Respondent
W.P.(C) 9070/2025