The High Court of Bombay, in its Civil Appellate Jurisdiction, reviewed the dispute regarding the eligibility of bidders for a project involving the scientific reclamation of a dumpsite in Ichalkaranji. The petitioner, Adarsh Bharat Enviro Pvt. Ltd., challenged the qualification of Respondent No. 3, Greentech Environ Management Pvt. Ltd., claiming that the latter was ineligible due to a debarment order issued by the Cuttack Municipal Corporation.

The Court examined the technical and pre-qualification criteria outlined in the tender conditions and found that the decision by the tender committee to qualify Respondent No. 3 was made in consultation with an expert body, which had validated the eligibility of the respondent. The Court upheld the expert committee's decision, citing the limited scope of judicial review in matters involving technical expertise.

1. Introduction:

• Overview of the parties involved and the nature of the dispute.
• Adarsh Bharat Enviro Pvt. Ltd. contested the qualification of Greentech Environ Management Pvt. Ltd. in a tender process for scientific dumpsite reclamation.

2. Background of the Case:

• Details about the invitation for bids issued by Ichalkaranji Municipal Corporation and the terms and conditions outlined in the Request for Proposal (RFP).
• Description of the tender process and the challenges raised by the petitioner regarding the eligibility of Respondent No. 3.

3. Petitioner's Contentions:

• Arguments made by the petitioner regarding the ineligibility of Respondent No. 3 based on a prior debarment order.
• Specific references to the tender conditions that the petitioner claimed Respondent No. 3 failed to meet.

4. Respondent's Defense:

• Defense provided by Respondent No. 3, citing the revocation of the debarment order and the expert committee's validation of their eligibility.
• Arguments about the limited scope of judicial review in decisions made by technical experts.

5. Court's Analysis:

• Examination of the tender conditions, specifically regarding the debarment and pre-qualification criteria.
• The Court's reasoning in upholding the decision of the expert body and the tender committee.

6. Judgment:

• The Court ruled in favor of Respondent No. 3, dismissing the writ petition filed by Adarsh Bharat Enviro Pvt. Ltd.
• The decision emphasized the importance of relying on expert opinions in technical matters.

7. Conclusion:

• The judgment's implications for future tender processes and the limited role of judicial intervention in such cases.