Gauhati High Court
The Union Of India And 2 Ors vs M/S Bn Infraprojects Llp And 4 Ors B on 21 May, 2026
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010025032023
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WA/255/2023
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS
REP. BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, N.F. RAILWAY, MALIGAON,
GUWAHATI- 781011.
2: THE CHIEF ENGINEER/CON-3
N.F. RAILWAY
MALIGAON
GUWAHATI-781011.
3: THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER
N.F. RAILWAY
MALIGAON
GUWAHATI-781011
VERSUS
M/S BN INFRAPROJECTS LLP AND 4 ORS B
A LTD. LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT
AMBAGAN ROAD, BYE LANE, NEAR MADHUBAN FACTORY, TEZPUR-
784001, DIST. SONITPUR, ASSAM AND REP. BY ITS DESIGNATED PARTNER
SRI BABUL NATH, S/O. SRI MANORANJAN NATH, R/O. VILL. POLICE LINE,
TEZPUR, SONITPUR- 784001.
2:BABUL NATH
S/O. SHRI MANORANJAN NATH
VILL. POLICE LINE
TEZPUR
SONITPUR-784001
ASSAM.
3:SHARMISTHA NATH
D/O. ROMEN DEV NATH
Page No.# 2/6
R/O. TEZPUR TOWN
WARD NO.12
SONITPUR.
4:PRANAB NATH
S/O. MANORANJAN NATH
VILL. EX-POLICE LINE
TEZPUR-784001
SONITPUR
ASSAM.
5:M/S M.K. PUSPHAS SHIVAM (JV)
M.K. ENGINEERING
WEST MALIGAON
GUWAHATI- 781011
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H GUPTA,
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. M BISWAS (R-1 TO 4), S K DAS (R-1 TO 4)
Linked Case : WA/385/2023
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
GENERAL MANAGER NF RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI PIN 781011
VERSUS
M/S BN INFRAPROJECTS LLP AND 3 ORS
LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT AMBAGAN ROAD
BYE LANE
NEAR MADHUBAN FACTORY
TEZPUR-784001 IN THE DISTRICT OF SONITPUR
ASSAM AND REPRESENTED BY ITS DESIGNATED PARTNER SHRI BABUL
NATH
S/O SRI SHRI MANORANJAN NATH
R/O VILL- POLICE LINE
TEZPUR
SONITPUR-784001.
Page No.# 3/6
------------
Advocate for : MR H GUPTA Advocate for : MR. M BISWAS appearing for M/S BN INFRAPROJECTS LLP AND 3 ORS Linked Case : WA/383/2023 THE UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS REP. BY THE GENERAL MANAGER N.F. RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI-781011.
2: THE CHIEF ENGINEER/CON-3 N.F. RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI-781011.
3: THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER N.F. RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI-781011.
VERSUS M/S BN INFRAPROJECTS LLP AND 4 ORS A A LTD. LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT AMBAGAN ROAD BYE LANE NEAR MADHUBAN FACTORY TEZPUR-784001 DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM AND REP. BY ITS DESIGNATED PARTNER SRI BABUL NATH S/O. SRI MANORANJAN NATH R/O. VILL. POLICE LINE TEZPUR SONITPUR
-784001.
2:BABUL NATH S/O. SHRI MANORANJAN NATH VILL. POLICE LINE TEZPUR SONITPUR-784001 Page No.# 4/6 ASSAM.
3:SHARMISTHA NATH D/O. ROMEN DEV NATH R/O. TEZPUR TOWN WARD NO.12 SONITPUR.
4:PRANAB NATH S/O. MANORANJAN NATH VILL. EX-POLICE LINE TEZPUR-784001 SONITPUR ASSAM.
5:M/S M.K GUPTA AND COMPANY REP. BY AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. M K GUPTA CARE OF M.K. GUPTA AND CO.
SEWAK ROAD SILIGURI WEST BANGAL PIN-734001.
------------
For the petitioner/appellant(s) : Mr. H. Gupta, CGC For the Respondent(s) : Mr. M. Biswas, Advocate
-B E F O R E -
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY 21.05.2026 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ) We have heard Mr. H. Gupta, learned Central Government Counsel for the appellants/Union of India and others, and Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the respondents.
This case relates to a tender dispute between the Indian Railways and the respondents.
The firm of the respondent No. 2 was earlier a sole proprietorship firm, Page No.# 5/6 which later became a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) firm. A tender was issued by the N.F. Railway (Construction wing) in the year 2021 for three major works (earthwork, construction of bridge and embankment on the new B.G. line in Assam). The respondents had participated in the tender process, but their technical bid was rejected on the ground of their not meeting the financial eligibility requirement of having received contractual payments in the last three financial years, along with current year, which was equal to at least 150% of the tender value, as required under the tender conditions.
Such rejection was challenged by the respondents vide three writ petitions, claiming that the tender clauses were misinterpreted by the appellants herein and their past credentials were wrongly ignored. It was thus urged on behalf of the respondents that the rejection of their technical bid was unfair, more so, for the reason of their having quoted a price which was much lower.
The writ petitions were allowed and it was observed by the writ court that the appellants ought to re-evaluate the financial eligibility of the respondents by taking into account their full credentials up to 13.02.2020, instead of limiting it only till its incorporation date of 09.04.2017. It was directed by the writ court that in case, after the re-do of the entire exercise, the respondents were found to have satisfied the financial eligibility criteria and the price quoted by them is lower, then the remaining works must be handed over to them. This judgment of the writ court was promptly put to challenge by the appellants on the ground that the learned Single Judge had misinterpreted the clear wordings of Clauses 9 and 10 of the tender Page No.# 6/6 documents and that such adjudication would only cause prejudice to the already selected lowest bidders, who had already started their works, and it would also put on hold the important public projects.
The judgment of the learned Single Judge was stayed. This Court today has been informed that in the meanwhile, the works allotted to the concessionaires have already been completed and thus adjudicating the matter now would only be an academic exercise.
In that view of the matter, we consign this set of appeals for the reason that the works in question have already been completed and there will be no use in agitating the issue in the present appeals.
The appeals stand disposed off accordingly.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant