Allahabad High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Tender Award in Pratapgarh Road Project

Court Upholds Tender Process, Emphasizes Limited Scope of Judicial Review in Contractual Matters

In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, dismissed a writ petition filed by M/S A.S. Traders challenging the award of a tender for the widening and strengthening of roads in Pratapgarh district. The petitioner contested the rejection of their bid and the acceptance of M/s Arunima Constructions as the successful bidder.

The Bench, comprising Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Prashant Kumar, emphasized the limited scope of judicial review in matters involving tenders and contractual awards. The court clarified that its role was to ensure the decision-making process was free from arbitrariness, irrationality, bias, or mala fides, rather than assess the correctness of the decision itself.

M/S A.S. Traders had participated in an e-tender process and submitted their bid through the Prahari portal. Post the technical bid evaluation, the petitioner's bid, along with four others, was deemed non-responsive by the tender evaluation committee. Subsequently, M/s Arunima Constructions was declared the L-1 bidder and awarded the contract.

The petitioner argued that their disqualification was legally untenable and raised concerns of malafide intentions in the awarding of the contract to M/s Arunima Constructions. However, the court found no merit in these claims, noting that objections to bids must be raised within a stipulated 72-hour period, a timeline the petitioner failed to adhere to.

The court relied on precedents from the Supreme Court, including cases such as Tata Cellular v. Union of India and Raunaq International Ltd. v. I.V.R. Construction Ltd., which underscore the principle that judicial intervention in contractual matters should be minimal unless there is clear evidence of arbitrariness or mala fide intent.

Emphasizing the importance of infrastructure projects, the court warned against halting public works over procedural technicalities, noting the potential loss to public interest and the state exchequer. The court concluded that no substantial grounds were presented to warrant interference and dismissed the writ petition.

Bottom Line:

Judicial review in matters of tender or contract award is limited to examining the decision-making process to ensure it is free from arbitrariness, irrationality, bias, or mala fides, and does not extend to evaluating the correctness or soundness of the decision itself.

Statutory provision(s): Constitution of India, Article 14

The judgment serves as a reminder of the judiciary's restrained role in reviewing contractual awards, especially in critical infrastructure projects, ensuring decisions made are lawful and in the public interest.

M/S A.S. Traders v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB)(Lucknow) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2804207