Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 66881
2025:MHC:2106 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved on 30.07.2025 Pronounced on 26.08.2025 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN W.P.(MD) Nos.20235 to 20238 and 20889 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.15603, 15605, 15615, 15617, 5667, 15669, 15611, 15612, 16164 & 16167 of 2025 I.Kezhson ... Petitioner in all W.Ps.
Vs.
1.The Director of Town Panchayat, 8th Floor, Urban Administrative Office Campus, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai 600 028.
2.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil.
3.The Executive Engineer, Town Panchayat Department, Tirunelveli Zone. ... R1 to R3 in all W.Ps.
4.The Executive Officer, Kadayal Selection Grade Town Panchayat, Kadayal, Kanyakumari District. ... R4 in W.P.(MD)
No.20235 of 2025
-
5.The Executive Officer, Edaicode Selection Grade Town Panchayat, Edaicode, Kanyakumari District. ... R4 in W.P.(MD)
No.20236 of 2025
6.The Executive Officer, Kulasekharam Selection Grade Town Panchayat, Kulasekharam, Kanyakumari District. ... R4 in W.P.(MD)
No.20237 of 2025
7.The Executive Officer, Ponmanai Selection Grade Town Panchayat, Ponmanai, Kanyakumari District. ... R4 in W.P.(MD)
No.20238 of 2025
8.The Executive Officer, Thiruvattar Town Panchayat, Thiruvattar, Kanyakumari District. ... R4 in W.P.(MD)
No.20889 of 2025 Prayer in W.P.(MD) No.20235 of 2025 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the tender summary report of the fourth respondent in Ref.No.165/2025/A1 titled Improvement of BT Road at Arunkani Anaimugam Road in Kadayal Town Panchayat, Kanyakumari District, TURIP 2025-26 dated 09.07.2025 and quashing the same and consequently directing the fourth respondent to open and include the price bid of the petitioner in the said tender in Ref.No.
165/2025/A1.
-
Prayer in W.P.(MD) No.20236 of 2025 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the tender summary report of the fourth respondent in Ref.No.21-2025A1 titled SFC Black topping at Attukonam Child Nursery Pilavilai to Mithappancode Road in Edaicode Town Panchayat dated 09.07.2025 and quashing the same and consequently directing the fourth respondent to open and include the price bid of the petitioner in the said tender in Ref.No.21-2025A1.
Prayer in W.P.(MD) No.20237 of 2025 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the tender summary report of the fourth respondent in Ref.No.188/2025/A1 titled SPECIAL FUND 2025-2026 – Improvements CC Road at Ward No.10, Kokottumoolai Junction to Thetricode Road in Kulasekharam Town Panchayat dated 09.07.2025 and quashing the same and consequently directing the fourth respondent to open and include the price bid of the petitioner in the said tender in Ref.No.188/2025/A1.
Prayer in W.P.(MD) No.20238 of 2025 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the tender summary report of the fourth respondent in Ref.No.274/2025/A1-1 titled SPECIAL FUND 2025-2026, Improvements of BT Road at Ariyambacode Shutter Road and Improvement of BT Road at Kuttiyani Putham Dam in Ponmanai Town Panchayat dated 04.07.2025 and quashing the same and consequently directing the fourth respondent to open and include the price bid of the petitioner in the said tender in Ref.No.274/2025/A1-1.
-
Prayer in W.P.(MD) No.20889 of 2025 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the tender summary report of the fourth respondent in Ref.No.90/2025/A1 titled SPECIAL FUND 2025-2026 improving the Road at Thiruvattar Charoor in Thiruvattar Town Panchayat dated 17.07.2025 and quashing the same and consequently directing the fourth respondent to open and include the price bid of the petitioner in the said tender in Ref.No.90/2025/A1.
For Petitioner in all W.Ps. : Mr.Puhazhgandhi For R1 to R3 in all W.Ps. : Mr.Veerakathiravan Additional Advocate General – II, assisted by Mr.D.Ghandiraj Special Government Pleader For R4 in all W.Ps. : Mr.J.K.Jayaselan Government Advocate *****
Tender rejection must comply with transparency and procedural fairness requirements. Failure to communicate reasons for rejection is a violation of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act.
Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 - Sections 8 and 10 - Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Rules, 2000 - Rule 21 and 32-A - Tender rejection - Petitioner challenged the rejection of bids due to improper documentation and lack of communication regarding reasons - Court held that rejection without proper reasons violates the Act and Rules. (Paras 5, 6, 19, 88)
(B) Judicial review - The scope is limited to examining arbitrariness or illegality in the tendering process - Fairness in competitive bidding is essential. (Paras 36, 86)
Facts of the case:
The Petitioner contested the rejection of their bids in five separate Writ Petitions on the basis of procedural violations during a procurement process for public works carried out by local Town Panchayats in Kanyakumari District. Petitioner argued that foundational documents were not correctly submitted as per the tendering requirements, and that others were awarded contracts without fair competition, thereby violating statutory provisions.
Findings of Court:
The Court found that the rejection of bids lacked substantial justification and breached the requirement for transparency and fairness mandated by law. The Court quashed the rejection orders and directed acceptance of the petitioner's bids subject to compliance with procedural rules.
Issues: 1) Were the reasons for rejecting the bids sufficiently communicated? 2) Was the tender process conducted in accordance with the statutory requirements?
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized that the tender acceptance authority must adhere to the prescribed procedures of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, ensuring all bidders are treated fairly and equitably within the bidding process, especially in light of the objectives for promoting competition.
Result: Writ Petitions allowed; rejection of bids quashed; directions issued to accept the Petitioner’s bids.
COMMON ORDER
By this common order, all these five Writ Petitions are being disposed of.
-
2. In these Writ Petitions, the Petitioner has challenged the Tender Summary Reports. By the impugned Tender Summary Reports, the Petitioner's bids, in respect of the tenders floated by the respective Town Panchayats, were rejected during the technical evaluation.
3. The details of the tender notifications, dates and reference numbers of the Impugned Tender Report, reasons for rejection of the bids, and the names of the persons to whom the contracts have been awarded are detailed below:-
| Sl. No | W.P. (MD) No. | Tender ID No. | Impugned Tender Summary Report | Reason for rejection | Name of the successful bider | |
| Date | Reference No. | |||||
| 1 | 20235/25 | 2025_DTP_567350_1 | 09.07.25 | 165/2025/A1 | Sl.No.7, 8, 10, 12 properly not enclosed | MJD Construction and Engineering Contractors P. Ltd |
| 2 | 20236/25 | 2025_DTP_564565_1 | 09.07.25 | 21-2025A1 | Sl.No.7, 8, 10, 12 - properly not enclosed | -do- |
| 3 | 20237/25 | 2025_DTP_564867_1 | 09.07.25 | 188/2025/A1 | Reject | S.Peter |
| 4 | 20238/25 | 2025_DTP_565210_1 | 04.07.25 | 274/2025/A1-1 | Reject | MJD Construction and Engineering Contractors P. Ltd |
| 5 | 20889/25 | 2025_DTP_565257_1 | 17.07.25 | 90/2025A1 | Reject | -do- |
-
4. These tenders were floated by the following Panchayats for the projects under the scheme mentioned below, on the respective dates:
| Sl. No | W.P.(MD) No. | Panchayat Name | Date of Tender Notf | Name of the Projects |
| 1 | 20235/25 | Kadayal Town Panchayat | 21.05.2025 | Providing BT Road at Kattavilai Nanthankadavu Road in Kadayal Town Panchayat |
| 2 | 20236/25 | Edaicode Town Panchayat | 30.05.2025 | Black Topping at Attukonam Child Nursery Pilavilai to Mithappancode Road in Edaicode Town Panchayat |
| 3 | 20237/25 | Kulasekhar am Town Panchayat | 02.06.2025 | Improvements CC Road at Ward No.10 Kokottumoolai Junction to Thetricode Road in Kulasekharan Town Panchayat |
| 4 | 20238/25 | Ponmani Town Panchayat | 02.06.2025 | Improvements of BT Road at Ariyambacode Shutter Road and Improvement of BT Road at Kuttiyani Putham Dam in Ponmanai Town Panchayat |
| 5 | 20889/25 | Thiruvattar Town Panchayat | 30.05.2025 | Improving the Road at Thiruvattar Charoor in Thiruvattar Town Panchayat |
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:-
5. The specific case of the Petitioner is that the reasons for rejection of the bid in the tenders pertaining to W.P.(MD) Nos.20237, 20238 & 20889 of 2025 were not communicated to the Petitioner, and therefore, the same is in contravention of Rule 32A(4) of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Rules, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules').
-
6. That apart, the further case of the Petitioner that the opening of the bid on the specified date was not done in the presence of the Petitioner and were thus in gross violation of Section 8 of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), read with Rule 21(1) and (3) of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Rules, 2000 .
7. That apart, it is submitted that, while opening the tender, the signature of the Petitioner was not obtained as is contemplated under the Act. It is further submitted that out of the three bidders involved in the tenders pertaining to W.P.(MD) Nos.20235 and 20236 of 2025, except for the Petitioner, the two other bidders, namely, Manikandan and MJD Construction and Engineering Contractors Private Limited belong to the same group.
8. It is submitted that the said Manikandan is the husband of Mrs.D.Janaga Jebangalin, who is none other than the shareholder and Managing Director of the said MJD Construction and Engineering Contractors Private Limited.
-
9. It is therefore submitted that awarding of contract is contrary to a series of guidelines issued by the Central Government, which are applicable to the State Government, as these projects are funded by the Central Government. It is submitted that it has resulted in a single effective bid being considered, in violation of the CBC Guidelines issued by the National Rural Road Development Agency, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India, in P17025/33/2011/P-1/RC dated 15.01.2013.
10. It is further submitted th
