Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Arbitrary Cancellation of Tender Award. State Warehousing Corporation's Cancellation of Contract Without Reasons or Hearing Held Unreasonable.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 39
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, M/s Bhagwati Builders, a proprietary concern of Vijay Agrawal, participated in a tender issued by Respondent No.1, Maharashtra State Warehousing Corporation, for construction work at Amgaon, District Gondia. The petitioner's bid was the lowest at 24.28% below the estimated cost. By letter dated 26.02.2021, the petitioner was asked to deposit a performance security of Rs.70,91,948/- by 05.03.2021 and to provide an explanation and rate analysis showing ability to perform at the quoted rate. The petitioner deposited the amount on time and submitted an explanation on 05.03.2021, but did not include the rate analysis. Later, on 22.03.2021, the petitioner submitted the rate analysis with a further explanation. However, Respondent No.1 cancelled the contract without assigning any reasons or giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the cancellation. The court found that the cancellation was arbitrary and unreasonable, as the petitioner had complied with the initial requirements and had a legitimate expectation that the contract would be awarded. The court set aside the cancellation and directed Respondent No.1 to reconsider the matter and pass a reasoned order within four weeks.

Headnote

A) Tender Law - Cancellation of Award - Arbitrariness - Respondent No.1 cancelled the contract awarded to the petitioner without providing any reasons or opportunity of hearing - The court held that the cancellation was arbitrary and unreasonable as the petitioner had already deposited the performance security and submitted explanations - The court directed Respondent No.1 to reconsider the matter and pass a reasoned order (Paras 1-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the cancellation of the tender awarded to the petitioner by Respondent No.1 was arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of principles of natural justice.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the cancellation, and directed Respondent No.1 to reconsider the matter and pass a reasoned order within four weeks.

Law Points

  • Tender law
  • Judicial review of administrative action
  • Reasonableness
  • Legitimate expectation
  • Non-application of mind
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (BOM) (06) 87

Writ Petition No. 3639 of 2021

2022-06-17

Sunil B. Shukre, Smt. M.S. Jawalkar

Mr. Kaustubh Deogade for Petitioner, Mr. N.R. Saboo for Respondent No.1

M/s Bhagwati Builders, through its proprietor, Vijay S/o Vishnuprasad Agrawal

Maharashtra State Warehousing Corporation, Pune; Bajaj Steel Industries Limited, Nagpur

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging cancellation of tender award by State Warehousing Corporation.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought quashing of the cancellation and direction to award the contract.

Filing Reason

Respondent No.1 cancelled the contract awarded to the petitioner without reasons or hearing.

Issues

Whether the cancellation of the tender award was arbitrary and unreasonable. Whether the petitioner was entitled to a hearing before cancellation.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that cancellation was arbitrary and without reasons. Respondent No.1 argued that the petitioner failed to submit rate analysis in time.

Ratio Decidendi

An administrative decision to cancel a tender award must be based on reasons and cannot be arbitrary; the party affected must be given an opportunity to be heard.

Judgment Excerpts

The cancellation of the contract awarded to the petitioner was arbitrary and unreasonable. The petitioner had deposited the performance security and submitted explanations, but the respondent cancelled without any reasons.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition after Respondent No.1 cancelled the contract awarded to the petitioner without providing reasons or an opportunity of hearing.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Quashes Termination of Railway Contract as Arbitrary and Violative of Natural Justice. Writ Petition Maintainable Despite Arbitration Clause Under Article 226 of Constitution of India, as Termination Notices Dated 13.11.2025 and 02.12.2025...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Forfeiture Order for Omission to State Grounds Under Section 99A of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898. High Court Must Set Aside Order When Government Fails to State Grounds of Opinion; Mere Citation of Offence Sections Insufficient...