Case Note & Summary
The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur, heard a batch of two writ petitions filed by JCL Infra Private Limited against Jaipur Development Authority and others. The lead case, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8120/2025, challenged the re-invitation of a tender for consultancy services for preparation of a detailed project report (DPR) for an elevated road and flyover at OTS Junction, Jaipur, vide NIB dated 03.04.2025. The connected petition, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17571/2024, challenged the withdrawal of work earlier awarded to the petitioner. The petitioner, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013, had been awarded an EPC contract for traffic improvement and beautification work at OTS Crossing on 14.12.2022, based on a DPR prepared by Sincere Architects Engineers Pvt. Ltd. A contract agreement was executed on 27.12.2022. The petitioner claimed to have mobilized resources and incurred substantial expenditure, completing work worth Rs. 20.41 Crores of a total investment of about Rs. 40 Crores. Despite repeated submissions and requests for approvals and payments, respondents failed to accord site approvals and release payments. On 24.04.2024, respondents withdrew the entire awarded work under Clause 32 of the contract without granting any opportunity of hearing or providing reasons. The petitioner sent legal notices and filed the first writ petition. During pendency, respondents re-invited consultancy bids for the same OTS Flyover segment, prompting the second writ petition. The petitioner argued that re-invitation was arbitrary and violative of promissory estoppel, and that Clause 32 only permitted partial withdrawal, not termination of the entire contract. The court heard arguments and reserved judgment on 23.04.2026, pronouncing the full judgment on 02.06.2026. However, the provided extract ends during the petitioner's submissions and does not include the court's analysis or final decision. The case remains pending for further orders, with other related matters (D.B. SAW/769/2026 and one more) having been filed.
Headnote
A) Tender Law - Re-invitation of Tender - Arbitrary Action - Public Works Financial and Accounts Rules, Part-II - Petitioner challenged re-invitation of DPR consultancy tender for OTS Flyover after work already awarded and executed; alleged violation of promissory estoppel and natural justice; final decision not available in provided text (Paras 1-2.7). B) Contract Law - Withdrawal of Work - Scope of Clause 32 - Not applicable (contractual clause) - Petitioner contended Clause 32 permits only partial withdrawal, not unilateral termination of entire contract; withdrawal letter dated 24.04.2024 was without opportunity of hearing; final decision not available (Paras 2.6-2.7). C) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Opportunity of Hearing - Not applicable (general principles) - Petitioner argued respondents withdrew work without affording any opportunity of hearing or assigning cogent reasons; final decision not available (Paras 2.6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether re-invitation of tender including OTS Flyover after work already awarded and substantially executed is arbitrary and illegal; whether withdrawal of entire work under Clause 32 of the contract without notice or hearing is valid; whether respondents failed to grant necessary site approvals and payments causing financial prejudice to petitioner.
Final Decision
Not mentioned in the provided text; the extract ends during petitioner's submissions and does not include the final decision
Law Points
- Doctrine of promissory estoppel
- principles of natural justice
- scope of partial withdrawal under Clause 32
- arbitrary exercise of power by public authority
- tender re-invitation after award
