Sai Eternal Foundation Vs National Highways Logistic Management Ltd. (Nhlml) — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sai Eternal Foundation Vs National Highways Logistic Management Ltd. (Nhlml) — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respondent-NHLML directed to consider release of the Bid Security amounts for the respective Projects in favour of the petitioner with due expedition; petitioner's undertaking to forego interest on the said amount placed on record.

Issue for consideration

Whether the forfeiture of the petitioner's Bid Security and cancellation of the Letters of Award by NHLML was justified, given that the petitioner could not obtain an OEM agreement, which it contended was because European companies had formed a cartel. +1 more

Court's answer

Under the facts of the present case, the non-availability of the OEM was not attributable to the petitioner, notwithstanding NHLML's attempt to justify the Impugned Orders.

Ratio / Principle

The respondent-NHLML was directed to consider the release of the bid security amount with due expedition.

Key takeaways

It was made clear that this order shall not serve as a precedent in any future cases.obiter¶8
The undertaking of the petitioner to forego the interest on the said amount was placed on record.obiter¶48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Three writ petitions (W.P.(C) 15140/2025, W.P.(C) 18200/2025, W.P.(C) 19630/2025) by Sai Eternal Foundation against National Highways Logistics Management Ltd. (NHLML) were decided by a common oral order of the High Court of Delhi (Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J.) on 23.03.2026. NHLML had cancelled the Letters of Award for three ropeway projects (Dhosi Hill, Haryana; SDA Parking to Shankaracharya Temple, Jammu & Kashmir; Shankar Viman Mandapam to Triveeni Pushp, Prayagraj) and forfeited the petitioner's Bid Security after the petitioner failed to meet the RFP requirement of having an agreement with an Original Equipment Manufacturer, a failure the petitioner attributed to a cartel of European companies. Finding that the non-availability of an OEM was not attributable to the petitioner, the Court directed NHLML to consider release of the Bid Security amounts with due expedition; the petitioner undertook to forego interest on the said amounts. The J&K ropeway project had been scrapped and the remaining projects re-tendered and taken up by the successful bidder. The Court expressly clarified that the order shall not serve as a precedent in any future cases. Petitions disposed of.

$~62 to 64

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 15140/2025

Date of Decision : 23.03.2026

IN THE MATTERS OF:

SAI ETERNAL FOUNDATION .....Petitioner

Through: Mr.Tarun Johri, Mr.Ankur Gupta, Mr.Vishwajit Tyagi Advocates.

versus

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT LTD. (NHLML)

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Arun Kumar Varma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate. Mr. Prashant Jain, V.P. Ropeways in person.

W.P.(C) 18200/2025

SAI ETERNAL FOUNDATION .....Petitioner

Through: Mr.Tarun Johri, Mr.Ankur Gupta, Mr.Vishwajit Tyagi Advocates.

versus

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS LOGISTIC MANAGEMENT LTD

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Arun Kumar Varma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate. Mr. Prashant Jain, V.P. Ropeways in person.

Signature Not Verified

Signed By:NEHA CHOPRA Signing Date:28.03.2026 10:48:17

Signature Not Verified Signed By:PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KA URAV

AND

+ W.P.(C) 19630/2025

SAI ETERNAL FOUNDATION .....Petitioner

Through: Mr.Tarun Johri, Mr.Ankur Gupta, Mr.Vishwajit Tyagi Advocates.

versus

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS LOGISTIC MANAGEMENT LTD. (NHLML)

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Arun Kumar Varma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate. Mr. Prashant Jain, V.P. Ropeways in person.

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

JUDGEMENT

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL)

These three writ petitions, having the same parties, common facts, and overlapping issues are being decided by this common order.

The respondent-National Highways Logistics Management Ltd. (“ NHLML ”) seems to have floated tenders for the Development, Operation and Maintenance of Dhosi Hill Ropeway, in Haryana; ropeway from SDA Parking to Shankaracharya Temple in Jammu and Kashmir; and ropeway between Shankar Viman Mandapam and Triveeni Pushp at Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh (“ Projects ”). Upon the petitioner submitting its bids, Letter of Awards dated 14.03.2024, and 23.01.2024 were issued by the NHLML.

Signature Not Verified

Signed By:PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KA URAV

Signature Not Verified

Signed By:NEHA CHOPRA Signing Date:28.03.2026 10:48:17

Thereafter, it appears that on account of the non-availability of European suppliers, the requirement under the Request for Proposal (“ RFP ”) of having an agreement with a Original Equipment Manufacturer (“ OEM ”), could not be complied with. Taking cognisance of the aforesaid, NHLML passed the Impugned Orders, whereby, the Bid Security submitted by the petitioner for each of the Projects have been forfeited and the Letters of Award have been cancelled.

Concomitantly, with the petitioner being unable to undertake the projects, the Projects were put for fresh bids. The bids were, thereafter, accepted and the work is being carried out by the successful bidder. It be noted that one of the projects i.e., ropeway from SDA Parking to Shankaracharya Temple in Jammu and Kashmir has been scrapped.

The petitioner contends that European companies had formed a Cartel and, thus, he could not get an agreement with an OEM.

Though, the respondent-NHLML has attempted to justify the Impugned Orders, however, under the facts of the present case, the Court finds that the non-availability of OEM, is not attributable to the petitioner. The Court, therefore, deems it appropriate to direct the respondent-NHLML to consider for the release of the Bid Security amounts for the respective Projects, in favour of the petitioner.

Accordingly, it is directed that the respondent-NHLML shall consider the release of the bids security amount with due expedition.

It is made clear that this order shall not serve as a precedent in any

Signature Not Verified

Signed By:NEHA CHOPRA Signing Date:28.03.2026 10:48:17

Signed By:PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KA URAV

Signature Not Verified

future cases.

The undertaking of the petitioner is also placed on record that it will forego the interest of the said amount.

With the aforesaid observations, the instant petitions stand disposed of.

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J

MARCH 23, 2026 Nc

Signature Not Verified Signed By:PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KA URAV

Signature Not Verified

Signed By:NEHA CHOPRA Signing Date:28.03.2026 10:48:17