When seeking services, multiple agencies are invited to tender, and decisions are based on price and service quality. Similarly, government tenders involve a competitive bidding process. Issues of malpractice and bias have often plagued India's tendering processes, leading to legal challenges.
The Jharkhand Road Construction Department invited tenders for the Nagaruntari-Dhurki-Ambakhoriya Road reconstruction. Despite participating and providing a bank guarantee, Vinod Kumar Jain's tender was later cancelled due to non-compliance with Standard Bidding Document terms.
The primary issue before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court had the right to intervene in the tender awarded to the appellant, and whether the appellant's bid was non-responsive.
After reviewing the case, the Supreme Court criticized the High Court's intervention, emphasizing the importance of non-interference unless there is clear arbitrariness or malpractice. It referenced precedents like Tata Cellular v. Union of India and emphasized the government's discretion in tender processes under Article 14 of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court overturned the High Court's decision, highlighting that interfering in public service contracts without substantial cause can harm public interest and infrastructure development.
Leave a comment