SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 9659

PATNA HIGH COURT
Mahavir Pumps Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CWJC-16693/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16693 of 2025 ======================================================

Mahavir Pumps Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. having its registered Office at 4, Ho- Chi-Minh Sarani, KBR Complex, Kolkata West Bengal- 700071 through its authorised signatory Debasish Bandyopadhyay, aged about 57 years, Male, son of late Sudhir Bandyopadhyay, resident of M/3, Chandra Nath Road, Dilip Math, Tiljala, South 24 Parganas, PS- Tiljala, West Bengal 700039.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Engineer in Chief-cum- Special Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Bihar, Patna.

3. The Regional Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Bhagulpur Zone, Bhagalpur.

4. The Superintendent Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, PH Circle Munger.

5. The Superintendent Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, PH Circle Begusarai.

6. The Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, PH Division Khagaria, Khagaria.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhinav Srivastava, Sr. Advocate Mr. Nirbhay Prashant, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.K. Shahi, Advocate General ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA)

Date : 13-02-2026 Heard Mr. Abhinav Srivastava, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.K. Shahi, learned Advocate General for the Respondents.

2. Following reliefs are sought for in the present application:

“ 1 (i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order, or direction quashing and setting aside the rejection of the petitioner's technical bid dated 03.10.2025 in the Short Term Re-Tender NIT No. MMNPY- 04/PHED/KHG-2025-26/ (SBA/SBFe), which was rejected on the basis of debarment orders dated 02.09.2020 (Memo No. 2256) and 04.01.2021 (Memo No. 33), listed at Serial Nos. 152 & 153 in the debarment list on the official website, as the debarment orders themselves expressly contemplated operation "till the next tender" and have now lapsed, despite which their continued effect is causing ongoing civil consequences to the petitioner, including financial loss, reputational damage, and denial of legitimate business opportunity.

(ii) Direct the respondents to consider and evaluate the petitioner's technical bid and open its financial bid in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Tender Document; (iii) Quash the debarment orders dated 02.09.2020 (Memo No. 2256) and 04.01.2021 (Memo No. 33) issued under Sub-rule (ii) of Rule 11(a) of the Bihar Contractor Registration Rules, 2007, as arbitrary, illegal, and without jurisdiction;

In the alternative, for a declaration that the debarment orders dated 02.09.2020 (Memo No. 2256) and 04.01.2021 (Memo No. 33), as the debarment orders themselves expressly contemplated operation "till the next tender", have now ceased to operate, and that their continued listing is causing ongoing civil consequences to the petitioner, including financial loss, reputational damage, and denial of legitimate business opportunity, and therefore cannot be enforced against the petitioner.

(iv) For a direction to the respondents to remove the petitioner's name from the debarment list published on the official website of the Public Health Engineering Department, Bihar, Patna, as the debarment orders were operative only till the next tender, have now ceased to operate, and their continued listing is causing ongoing civil consequences to the petitioner, including financial loss, reputational damage, and denial of legitimate business opportunity, and therefore cannot be enforced against the petitioner.

(v) For directing Respondent No. 3 to cancel the award of contract or the purchase

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top