The Delhi HC in, TRACK AND TOWERS INFRATECH P LTD v. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, rejected to interfere in the decision taken by NHAI stating that the courts must refrain from interfering in the decision. The court however also stated that even though decisions taken can’t be subject to judicial scrutiny, the process is subjected to judicial review.
Facts
Petitioner seeks to quash of NHAI order holding its bid as non-responsive for a project. The petitioner submitted its bid and in the Pre-Bid Meeting, it raised a query as to whether construction of railway tracks is considered a “similar work” for qualifying in the eligibility criteria to which they asked them to rely on a clause of the offer. NHAI had sought a clarification from the petitioner as to how the projects which it had executed, satisfies the terms and conditions specified in the tender document. The petitioner referred to the aforementioned clause. The respondents rejected the bid, and the petitioner asked for the reason to which they replied that the railway track was not a similar work.
Contentions of Petitioner
The Counsel contended that the clause categorically states that the highways sector would be deemed to include railways and the reason for rejection for erroneous.
Contentions of Respondent
The counsel stated that it was laid down that the bidder has to show that it has received payments of over Rs.495.51 crores in the last five financial years preceding the bid due date. A few more reasons were given as to why they should be rejected to which the petitioner replied that they were vague.
Court’s Observation
The court after a perusal of the arguments, analyzed the scope of its interference in administrative action while making reliance on Jagdish Mandal v. State of Orissa where the extent was analyzed by posing two questions. The court stated that the owner of the project is the author of the tender documents, is the best person to appreciate its requirement and interpret the documents and HC should refrain from interfering in the matter. The court stated that the correctness of the decision can’t be interfered with but the decision-making process can be subjected to judicial review. The Court analyzing the matter stated that the decision of NHAI does not warrant any interference. The COurt further stated, “The petitioner has not been able to demonstrate that the decision-making process adopted by the respondent/NHAI is perverse, irrational or tainted with mala fides or is designed to favor a particular party.”
Case Details
W.P.(C) 3743/2020
Counsel for petitioner- Mr. R.K. Sanghi and Mr. Ishan Sanghi, Advocates.
Counsel for respondent- Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Madhu Sweta and Ms. Raveena Dewan, Advocates.
Coram- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Share this Document :
Picture Source :
