High Court of Bombay Considers Writ Petition Against Tender Process Decisions Alleging Arbitrary Rejection of Bid and Cancellation of Experience Certificate. Petitioner Seeks Declaration That Respondent No. 7 Lacks Technical Eligibility and Challenges Communication Dated 31/08/2019.

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging rejection of petitioner's bid and cancellation of work experience certificate in a tender process for road improvement work.

Quashing of communications dated 31/08/2019 (rejection of petitioner's L-1 offer), 20/08/2019 (cancellation of work experience certificate), 09/08/2019 (rejection of petitioner's objection to respondent no.7's eligibility), and a declaration that respondent no.7 does not satisfy technical eligibility criteria.

Alleged arbitrary cancellation of the work experience certificate and rejection of petitioner's L-1 bid, and failure to disqualify respondent no.7's joint venture despite alleged lack of eligibility.

Legality of communication dated 31/08/2019 rejecting petitioner's offer as L-1. Legality of communication dated 20/08/2019 cancelling the work experience certificate issued by respondent no.6. Legality of communication dated 09/08/2019 rejecting petitioner's objection to respondent no.7's eligibility. Whether respondent no.7 satisfies the technical eligibility criteria of the tender process.

Respondent no.7 objected to petitioner's eligibility by expressing doubt about completion of sub-contracted work within the stated period and absence of a work in hand certificate apart from the sub-contract certificate. Petitioner objected to respondent no.7's eligibility vide letter dated 08/08/2019, which was rejected by the Tender Evaluation Committee.

B y the present petition challenge is raised (a) to the communication dated 31/8/2019 ...; (b) the communication dated 20/8/2019 ...; (c) the communication dated 9/8/2019 ... and (d) a further declaration ... that the respondent no.7 does not satisfy the technical eligibility criteria ... On 1/8/2019, a meeting was held for opening the price bid ... representatives ... accepted that both of them were technically qualified. Mr. Sumit Bajoriya ... picked up the attendance register ... and walked out ...

On 29/06/2009, a notice inviting tender was published by respondent no.4 for improvement of a road stretch. Petitioner, respondent no.7 (a joint venture), and another bidder submitted bids. To satisfy eligibility, petitioner relied on a work experience certificate dated 05/12/2018 issued by respondent no.6 for sub-contracted work from Madhucon Projects Ltd. Technical bids were opened on 20/07/2019; the third bidder was disqualified. Respondent no.7 raised objections to petitioner's eligibility, which were rejected by the Tender Evaluation Committee. On 01/08/2019, at a meeting for opening price bids, both parties accepted each other's technical eligibility, and petitioner's price bid was opened, revealing it as L-1. However, a representative of respondent no.7 created a disruption and took away documents, halting the process. Subsequently, respondent no.7's financial bid was opened on 14/08/2019 and found to be higher. Later, respondent no.5 cancelled petitioner's work experience certificate (20/08/2019) and respondent no.4 rejected petitioner's offer (31/08/2019). Petitioner also challenged the rejection of its objection to respondent no.7's eligibility (09/08/2019). Petitioner filed the writ petition seeking quashing of these decisions and declaration that respondent no.7 is not eligible. The High Court heard arguments and reserved judgment on 07/10/2020, delivering it on 28/10/2020.