Case Note & Summary
The case involves a tender dispute over the construction of a BT road in Telangana. The appellant, M/S N Ramachandra Reddy, and the fourth respondent participated in a tender floated by the Roads and Buildings Department. The tender required bidders to own a Batch Type Hot Mix Plant within 100 km of the work site. The appellant submitted a certificate showing 99.05 km. The fourth respondent objected, leading to verification by the Superintending Engineer, Warangal, who reported 101.50 km via the original route and 99.90 km via an alternate route. The Chief Engineer then sought a report from the Superintending Engineer, Karimnagar, who reported 98.1 km. Based on this, the tender was awarded to the appellant as the lowest bidder. The fourth respondent challenged this in a writ petition, which was dismissed by the Single Judge. However, the Division Bench allowed the intra-court appeal, holding that the report of the Superintending Engineer, Karimnagar, was not legally justified and directing award based on the Warangal report. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that the Chief Engineer acted within his powers to seek re-verification from an independent authority, and the Division Bench erred in interfering with the tender process. The court emphasized that judicial review in tender matters is limited to examining the decision-making process for arbitrariness, mala fides, or illegality, and the Division Bench exceeded its jurisdiction by substituting its own view.
Headnote
A) Tender Law - Eligibility Criteria - Distance Requirement - The tender condition required the bidder to own a Batch Type Hot Mix Plant located within 100 km from the last point of working reach. The appellant furnished a certificate showing 99.05 km. On objection by the fourth respondent, the Chief Engineer obtained verification reports. The Superintending Engineer, Warangal, reported 101.50 km via original route and 99.90 km via alternate route. The Chief Engineer then sought a report from the Superintending Engineer, Karimnagar, who reported 98.1 km. The Division Bench held that the report of the Superintending Engineer, Karimnagar, was not legally justified and directed award based on the Warangal report. The Supreme Court held that the Chief Engineer acted within his powers to seek re-verification from an independent authority, and the Division Bench erred in interfering with the tender process. (Paras 16-24) B) Tender Law - Judicial Review - Scope - The court's role in tender matters is limited to examining the decision-making process for arbitrariness, mala fides, or illegality. The Division Bench exceeded its jurisdiction by substituting its own view on the distance measurement and directing award of work based on a particular report. (Paras 23-24) C) Tender Law - Re-verification - Permissibility - When a tender condition permits objections, the tendering authority has the implied power to re-verify and re-consider material. The Chief Engineer's action in seeking a report from the Superintending Engineer, Karimnagar, was a valid exercise of this power, especially since the Warangal report gave two different distances. (Paras 16-22)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in interfering with the tender process and directing award of work based on a report of the Superintending Engineer, Warangal, when the Chief Engineer had obtained an independent verification report from the Superintending Engineer, Karimnagar, showing the distance within the prescribed limit.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Division Bench order, and restored the order of the Single Judge dismissing the writ petition. The court held that the Chief Engineer's action in seeking a re-verification report from the Superintending Engineer, Karimnagar, was permissible and the Division Bench erred in interfering with the tender process.
Law Points
- Tender law
- Judicial review
- Re-verification
- Distance measurement
- Hot Mix Plant
- Letters Patent Appeal
