| Case Name | Banshidhar Construction Pvt. Ltd. vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. & Others |
| Introduction | The case pertains to the rejection of Banshidhar Construction Pvt. Ltd.’s technical bid by Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. (BCCL) while accepting another bidder’s technical bid, even though the other bidder did not fulfill certain mandatory tender requirements. The appellant challenged this rejection in the High Court, which upheld BCCL’s decision. |
| Factual Background | Banshidhar Construction Pvt. Ltd. submitted a bid in response to BCCL’s Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) for a coal mining project. However, their technical bid was rejected due to issues related to the notarization of the Power of Attorney. The successful bidder, Respondent No. 8, was later found to have failed to meet certain mandatory eligibility criteria. |
| Legal Issues | Whether BCCL was justified in rejecting the appellant’s technical bid based on the Power of Attorney notarization issue while accepting the bid of Respondent No. 8, who failed to comply with mandatory tender conditions. |
| Applicable Law |
|
| Analysis | The Court found that BCCL’s rejection of the appellant’s bid was unjustified, as the appellant had submitted all required documents, including a notarized Power of Attorney. The acceptance of the other bidder’s bid, despite their failure to meet eligibility criteria, was deemed arbitrary and discriminatory. |
| Conclusion | The Court set aside BCCL’s decision to reject the appellant’s bid and declare Respondent No. 8 as the successful bidder. It ordered a fresh tender process to ensure fairness and transparency. |
| Current Scenario | BCCL’s impugned decision and subsequent agreement with the successful bidder have been invalidated. BCCL must initiate a new tender process in compliance with legal standards. |
CASE SUMMARY- In this case, Banshidhar Construction Pvt. Ltd. challenged the rejection of their technical bid for a coal mining project tendered by Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. (BCCL). The rejection was based on a minor issue with the notarization of their Power of Attorney. The Supreme Court found BCCL’s action unjustified and discriminatory, especially as the winning bidder had not complied with critical eligibility requirements. The Court invalidated BCCL’s decision, ordering a fresh tender process to ensure fairness and transparency, emphasizing that public authorities must act by law, free from arbitrariness.
SOURCE – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
READ ALSO – SUPREME COURT OVERTURNS CONVICTION IN ABDUCTION AND MURDER CASE
