Legal

Tender – Rejection of Technical bid

The petitioner submitted the tender for allotment of the plot on lease.  The Technical Committee found that the petitioner and another tenderer failed to submit requisite documents and therefore, disqualified.

On 2.12.2024, the petitioner submitted representation after obtaining information under RTI on the reasons for rejection of its bid. 

In the meanwhile, the respondent no.3 was allotted the plot and paid first instalment of Rs.12,10,18,141/-.

On 6.1.2025, the petitioner received the copies of Technical Evaluation Report  and found that the bid was rejected on account of non-fulfilment of qualifications of technical criteria.

Failure to meet the prescribed criteria of having experience of construction of residential and/or commercial projects with total area of at lest 6 lakh square feet built up area and to submit summary information in prescribed format of Exh.IV.

The experience certificate of Architect produced by the petitioner shows that the petitioner constructed the “residential plus assembly building”.

The bidder was required to submit OC or completion certificate showing experience of construction of residential and/or commercial project with 6 lakhs sq.ft built up area.

The Tendering Authority refused to consider the experience of Petitioner for construction of Residential-cum-Assembly Project” as “construction of residential and/or commercial use” as required by the tender conditions.   The interpretation made by the tendering authority would be final and binding.

The petitioner cannot now be permitted to rely on additional documents after completion of tender process. 

The requirement of summary in format of Exhibit IV giving the details of each and every document relied on by the bidders in respect of experience of construction of residential and/or commercial project of at least 6 lakhs sq.ft built up area is also mandatory.   The Evaluation Committee was not supposed to go through the details of every document and scout for the relevant information. The contention of the petitioner is that the said format is not mandatory or is an ancillary document cannot be accepted.

The question of eligibility of successful bidder is academic when it is found that the petitioner is technically academic.  

Judgment dated  26.5.2025 of the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition (L) No.6662 of 2025 of Anik Industries Ltd   Vs.  Maharashtra Airport Development Company Ltd and others

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I HAVE READ THE DISCLAIMER AND AGREE TO IT.

User Acknowledgement

By proceeding further and clicking on the "AGREE" button herein below, I acknowledge that I of my own accord wish to know more about LegalDeli for my own information and use. I further acknowledge that there has been no solicitation, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever from LegalDeli or any of its members to create an Attorney-Client relationship through this knowledge site. I further acknowledge having read and understood the Disclaimer below.

Disclaimer
About: This knowledge-site (www.LegalDeli.in) is owned and operated by LegalDeli (“NDA”), and is a resource for your informational and educational purposes only.

No Warranty: NDA does not warrant that any content or information contained on this knowledge-site is accurate, correct, complete or up-to-date, and hereby disclaims any and all liability to any person for any actual or threatened loss or damage caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions result from negligence, accident or otherwise. NDA assumes no liability for the interpretation and/or use of the content and/or information contained on this knowledge-site, nor does it offer any warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied in relation to such content or information.

Third-Party Links: NDA does not intend that links / URLs contained on this knowledge-site re-directing users to third party websites be considered as referrals to, endorsements of, or affiliations with any such third party website operators. NDA is not responsible for, and makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, about the content or information contained on such third party websites to which links may be provided on this knowledge-site.

No Legal Advice: By clicking ‘I agree’ and proceeding further, you acknowledge, represent and undertake that you on your own accord wish to know more about NDA, its capabilities and research content and information contained on the knowledge-site, for your own knowledge and personal use. The content and information contained on this knowledge-site should not be construed as nor relied upon as legal advice. You as a reader or recipient of content or information contained in this knowledge-site should not act, nor refrain from acting, based upon any or all of such content or information, but should always seek the advice of competent legal counsel licensed to practice the relevant law in the appropriate jurisdiction.

No Attorney-Client Relationship: This knowledge-site is not intended to be and you should not consider the content or information contained therein to be an advertisement, solicitation, inducement or invitation for an Attorney-Client relationship. Transmission, receipt or use of this knowledge-site, including content and information contained therein, does not constitute nor create an Attorney-Client relationship between NDA and you.