Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Surinder Singh, sole proprietor of Bharat Construction Co., filed a writ petition challenging the introduction of a pre-condition of physical verification of machinery before opening Packet 'C' of a tender floated by the Mumbai Municipal Corporation. The tender was for AC77 Civil Works Contract for reinstatement of trenches. The petitioner argued that this condition was not part of the original bid document and was introduced orally on 23rd March 2010, making it illegal, arbitrary, and discriminatory. The court, after hearing both sides, dismissed the petition at the admission stage, holding that the condition was applied uniformly to all bidders and did not violate Article 14. The court noted that the petitioner's name did not appear in the final list published on 20th April 2010, but found no merit in the challenge as the condition was within the administrative discretion of the respondents.
Headnote
A) Tender Law - Pre-condition of Physical Verification - Validity - The court considered whether a condition of physical verification of machinery introduced after the bid submission but before opening of Packet 'C' was valid. The court held that such condition was not arbitrary or discriminatory as it was applied uniformly to all bidders and was within the administrative discretion of the tendering authority. (Paras 1-6)
B) Constitutional Law - Article 14 - Discrimination in Tender Process - The petitioner alleged discrimination due to introduction of a new condition. The court found no discrimination as the condition was applied to all bidders equally. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the introduction of a pre-condition of physical verification of machinery before opening Packet 'C' of the tender, dehors the bid document, is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, and unconstitutional.
Final Decision
The petition was dismissed at the admission stage. The court held that the pre-condition of physical verification was not arbitrary or discriminatory as it was applied uniformly to all bidders.
Law Points
- Tender process
- Physical verification
- Pre-condition
- Bid document
- Discrimination
- Arbitrariness
- Writ jurisdiction
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (05) 46
WRIT PETITION (LODGING) NO. 1054 OF 2010
J.N. Patel, Acting C.J., S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.
Mr. S.U. Kamdar a/w Ms.Pooja Patil, Ms.Jyoti Ghag i/b. Thakore Jariwala & Associates for the Petitioner, Mr. E.P. Bharucha for the Respondents
Surinder Singh, Sole Proprietor of Bharat Construction Co. (Bombay)
Mumbai Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai through Municipal Commissioner, Additional Municipal Commissioner (City), Chief Engineer (Roads, Traffic & Bridges), Deputy Chief Engineer (Roads) City
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the introduction of a pre-condition of physical verification of machinery in a tender process.
Remedy Sought
Declaration that the pre-condition of physical verification before opening Packet 'C' is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, and unconstitutional; quashing of rejection of petitioner's bid; quashing of final list published on 20th April 2010 without inclusion of petitioner's bid; prohibition on final awarding of tender without considering petitioner's bid.
Filing Reason
The petitioner's bid was rejected based on a condition of physical verification that was not part of the original bid document.
Issues
Whether the introduction of a pre-condition of physical verification of machinery before opening Packet 'C' of the tender, dehors the bid document, is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, and unconstitutional.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the condition of physical verification was introduced orally on 23rd March 2010, after the bid submission, and was not part of the bid document, making it illegal and arbitrary.
Respondents argued that the condition was applied uniformly to all bidders and was within their administrative discretion.
Ratio Decidendi
A condition introduced in a tender process, even if not originally in the bid document, is not per se illegal or arbitrary if it is applied uniformly to all bidders and does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution.
Judgment Excerpts
The Petition can be disposed of at the admission stage itself.
The Petitioner has invoked the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court for seeking a declaration that the pre condition of physical verification before opening of Packet 'C' of the tender de hors the bid document is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and thus unconstitutional...
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a writ petition in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay challenging the tender process. The court heard the matter and dismissed it at the admission stage on 4th May 2010.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 14
