Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2017 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (7) TMI 1425 - HC - Indian LawsAward of contract pursuant to its Notice Inviting Tenders (NIT) for providing security services - rejection of petitioner's bid - HELD THAT:- This Court is of the opinion that the claim in a writ petition for refund of EMD allegedly by encashing the bank guarantee without due cause per se is not a litigation relating to a "security job". The settled authorities, i.e. Tata Cellular v. Union of India [1994 (7) TMI 307 - SUPREME COURT], Michigan Rubber (India) Limited Vs. State of Karnataka & Others [2012 (3) TMI 512 - SUPREME COURT], Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. & Anr [2016 (9) TMI 1292 - SUPREME COURT], have emphasized that courts play a limited and circumscribed role in scrutiny, while exercising judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and that deference to executive decision ought to be the rule. This court is of opinion that in the facts of this case, the rejection of the petitioner's bid is plainly arbitrary as the tender evaluation committee adopted a wide interpretation of the tender condition. A wide interpretation - as held by this court, results in manifest injustice and arbitrariness, because it decrees exclusion and commercial limbo, as it were, to a party that is otherwise eligible and fit to enter into contract, merely because it has approached the courts. This exclusion is both in restraint of legal proceedings, as it prevents any entity from seeking legal redress, regardless of CGHS' unreasonableness in withholding any dues, and also is unfounded in law. For these reasons, the cancellation of the petitioners' bid is arbitrary and unreasonable. The decision to award the tender and the contract arising out of the award to the third respondent, Jai Prakash Security Agency is hereby set aside - Petition allowed.
|