Ms Lunar Consultants and Developers Vs the Vice Chairman DDA and Ors.

<a) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the decision of the Respondents declaring the Petitioner technically disqualified in Tender ID No. 2026_DDA_898274_1 issued pursuant to NIT No. 26/EE/HCD7/DDA/2025-26 (re) dated 12.02.2026.

¶17

b) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondents to reconsider the technical bid of the Petitioner strictly in accordance with the conditions of the Notice Inviting Tender and treat the Petitioner as technically responsive.

¶18

c) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction restraining the Respondents from opening the financial bid or creating third

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/03/2026 at 16:26:30

¶21

party rights including award of contract pursuant to the impugned tender.

¶22

d) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that the action of the Respondents in introducing new conditions during evaluation and applying unequal standards to bidders is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

¶23

e) Pass such other or further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case in the interest of justice.=

¶24

In substance, the grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been disqualified on technical specifications in respect of a tender issued by the respondents on 12.02.2026. The counsel for the petitioner contests the grounds on which the bid has been rejected. One of the pleas is that despite the representation having been made to the respondents, the same has not been answered till date. He states that the reason for him to file the writ petition is the respondents intend to open the financial bids today at 2:00 P.M.

¶25

We have heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the respondents at length.

¶26

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has the relevant experience for the tender inasmuch as the work which has been executed by the petitioner to show its eligibility, is identical to the work for which the present tender has been floated.

¶27

We do not say anything on the rival submissions advanced by the counsel for the parties.

¶28

Appropriate shall be that the representation submitted by the petitioner is decided by the respondents after giving the representative of the

¶29

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/03/2026 at 16:26:30

¶31

petitioner a hearing. It is agreed that a hearing shall be given to the representative of the petitioner at 2:00 P.M. by Mr. Vishal Kumawat, Executive Engineer, HCD-7, DDA, Sector-5, Dwarka (Central Nursery).

¶32

The counsel for the petitioner states that the representative shall appear before the said officer at 2 P.M.

¶33

It goes without saying that after hearing is given by the aforesaid officer, a reasoned order shall be passed and the same shall be conveyed to the petitioner.

¶34

If the petitioner is still aggrieved by the decision to be taken by the respondents, liberty shall be with the petitioner to approach this Court in accordance with law.

¶35

The writ petition is disposed of. Pending application is disposed of.

¶36

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

¶37

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J

¶38

MARCH 17, 2026/ msh

¶39

This is a digitally signed order.

¶40

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/03/2026 at 16:26:30

Ms Lunar Consultants and Developers v. the Vice Chairman DDA and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms Lunar Consultants and Developers v. the Vice Chairman DDA and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajit Singh & Ors. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Ms Power Line Air Express Vs Principal Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax & Ors.

Aishe Ghosh and Ors. Vs Jawaharlal Nehru University

Mohd Wasim & Ors. Vs Delhi Agriculture Marketing Board through Its Vice Chairman & Ors.

Praveen Saroha Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Bharti Cooperative Thrift and Credit Society Ltd. Vs Registrar Cooperative Societies Delhi & Ors.

M/S Headstar Construction Co. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Jyoti Kumar Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

Sushila Sharma Vs Sunil Kumar Sharma

Dr Mandeep Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Union of India & Anr. Vs SL-3179K Lt Col Chater Singh (Retd.)

Union of India and Ors. Vs Ex Nk Pramod S

Basant Vs Director General , Central Industrial Security Force and Ors.

Sanjay Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.