Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, P. G. Ajithkumar, JJ
REENA ENGINEERING AND CONTRACTORS PVT. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
KERALA WATER AUTHORITY – Respondent
WA 813 2023
Tender - Eligibility Challenge - Kerala High Court Act, 1958 - Article 226, Section 5 - The court evaluated eligibility under specific tender conditions, affirming the Special Committee's discretion and expertise in disqualifying bidders for their lack of requisite experience as per tender norms.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants challenged the disqualification from a tender for a water supply scheme on grounds of lacking requisite experience, while the respondent was found pre-qualified based on its past projects. The court examined the legality of the process undertaken by the Special Committee during pre-qualification assessments.
Issues: Whether the disqualification decision made by the Special Committee in regard to the eligibility of the appellants for the tender was lawful and justified.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that interference is unwarranted in specialized evaluations by competent authorities unless clear arbitrariness or mala fides are shown, thereby affirming the discretion exercised in tender assessments.
Final Decision: The writ appeals were dismissed, upholding the disqualification of the appellants from the tender process.
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran, J.
Since common issues are involved, these writ appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. W.A.No.811 of 2023:- The appellant, namely, Laxmi Civil Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd., filed W.P.(C) No.10993 of 2023 before this Court, invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P16 pre-qualification approval of tenders dated 25.03.2023 issued by the 4th respondent Superintending Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, PH Circle, Kozhikode to the extent it disqualified the petitioner in Ext.P1 e-tender notice dated 13.09.2022 regarding Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM) Phase II : Water Supply Scheme (WSS) to Chathamangalam and adjoining panchayats in Kozhikode District. The further reliefs sought for are a declaration that the petitioner is prequalified to get the work tendered in Ext.P1 e-tender notice dated 13.09.2022 and Ext.P2 notice inviting tender (Volume I); a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P16 to the extent it prequalified the 5th and 6th respondents, namely, Midland Engineering and Contracting Company and one Joseph John and the resultant award of tender in favour of the said respondents; and a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to accept the tender based on the rate quoted by the petitioner pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 tender notifications.
3. W.A.No.813 of 2023:- The appellant, namely, Reena Engineering and Contractors Pvt. Ltd., filed W.P.(C)No.10996 of 2023 seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P18 pre-qualification approval of tenders dated 25.03.2023 issued by the 4th respondent Superintending Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, PH Circle, Kozhikode to the extent it disqualified the petitioner in Ext.P1 e- tender notice dated 13.09.2022 regarding JJM Phase II : WSS to Chathamangalam and adjoining panchayats in Kozhikode District. The further reliefs sought for are a declaration that the petitioner is prequalified to get the work tendered in Ext.P1 e-tender notice dated 13.09.2022 and Ext.P2 notice inviting tender (Volume I); a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P18 to the extent it prequalified the 5th and 6th respondents, namely, Midland Engineering and Contracting Company and one Joseph John and the resultant award of tender in favour of the said respondents; and a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to accept the tender based on the rate quoted by the petitioner pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 tender notifications. The appellant submitted bid pursuant to Ext.P1 e-tender notification, in a joint venture with Laxmi Civil Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd., the appellant in W.A.No.811 of
2023.
4. By the judgment dated 11.04.2023, the learned Single Judge dismissed W.P.(C)Nos.10993 & 10996 of 2023 holding that the Special Committee for pre-qualification approval has examined the entire pros and cons of the matter and arrived at its own conclusions, taking into account the contentions advanced and the documents produced by the respective bidders. Even though the writ petitioners have raised contentions with respect to the ineligibility of respondents 5 and 6 to prequalify, it cannot be said that the evaluation done by the Special Committee is in any way illegal, arbitrary, perverse or out of any extraneous consideration or vitiated by mala fides. The Special Committee has evaluated the past experience of the writ petitioners and has arrived at its own findings, taking into account the documents produced and therefore, it cannot be said that the said evaluation is in any way bad, illegal or arbitrary. The learned Single Judge noticed that a full-fledged hearing and participation was given to all the bidders by the Special Committee consisting of technically qualified persons and the writ petitioners have not established any case of illegality, arbitrariness or any other legal infirmities to arrive at a different conclusion than the one arrived at by the Special Committee
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
