IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4808 of 2026 ==========================================================

JCC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.

Versus OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR HARSH N PAREKH(6951) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2 PRIYAL M PARIKH(7593) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2 MR RITURAJ M MEENA(3224) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MS AISHWARYA REDDY with MS PRABHDEEP KAUR for GUPTA LAW ASOCIATES (9818) for Respondent No.1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA Date : 06/04/2026

JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA)

1. This writ petition is filed to direct the respondents to permit the petitioners to submit its bid in respect to the tender, bearing Bid No.GEM/2026/B/7116513, dated

16.1.2026.

2. It is not in dispute that the process of tendering is online and initially the last date fixed for tendering the bids was on 6.2.2026. However, at the request of the petitioners, the last date for submission of the bid was extended to 13.2.2026.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that a bid was entered in on 13.2.2026 at 2.50 pm and at that time, the system gave the reply, “Entered price is invalid”. This indicates that a price bid which was invalid had been entered by the petitioners and, therefore, the bid was not accepted. This would also indicate that there was no technical glitch which prevented the price bid of the petitioners to be submitted.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioner immediately sent a message to ONGC highlighting the difficulty and had also made several representations to the concerned tender processing authority regarding the technical glitch, but there was absolutely no response. Learned counsel for the petitioners, therefore, submits that at least, a second prayer requesting for consideration of the representation be granted.

5. We are of the view that the petitioners have not made out a case either for permitting the petitioners to submit a bid nor for a direction to the respondents to consider the representations.

6. It is to be stated here that once an online process of bidding is prescribed and the last date is fixed, the petitioners would have to necessarily ensure that the bid is submitted within the time permitted. It is also not in dispute that a technical glitch cannot be a ground for any tenderer to raise a grievance and request for submission of his bid either physically or be granted one more opportunity to submit the bid. In the light of this, the first prayer for issuance of a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioners to submit a bid cannot be granted.

7. As far as the second prayer, i.e. to consider the representation of the petitioners, is concerned, learned counsel for the respondents submits that as of now, the technical bids submitted by the bidders are being evaluated. At this stage, once the evaluation of the tenders has commenced, it would be inappropriate to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioners, whereby, the petitioners were basically requesting for an opportunity to submit their bid afresh.

8. We, therefore, find no reason to entertain the writ petition. The petiton is, therefore, DISMISSED.

Sd/-

(N.S.SANJAY GOWDA,J)

Sd/-

(J. L. ODEDRA, J)

OMKAR