Writ appeal by an unsuccessful tenderer challenging inclusion of a rival bidder whose prior contract was terminated. The court held that satisfaction of the tender calling body governs past-performance evaluation and dismissed the appeal, affirming non-interference in technical tender evaluations.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.A. No.749/2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. P.S. DINESH KUMAR, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
WRIT APPEAL NO.749 OF 2022 (GM-TEN)
BETWEEN:
M/S . POWER MECH PROJECTS LTD FLAT NO.201, YESHWANTH RESIDENCY WIDIA COLONY, MIYAPUR HYDERABAD-500 049 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR. B. LAVAN KUMAR …APPELLANT
(BY SHRI. V. BHARATH KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
2
W.A. No.749/2022
(BY SHRI. J.N. AJAY, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SHRI. SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R2; SHRI. R.V.S. NAIK, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SHRI. NITIN PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03.08.2022 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN MATTER BEARING WP No.19159/2021
THIS WRIT APPEAL, HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 18.01.2024, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE , PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the unsuccessful petitioner in W.P. No.19159/2021 challenging the judgment dated August 03, 2022.
W.A. No.749/2022
3
3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are, KPC1
issued a Tender Notification for "Operation & Maintenance Contract” for 1X370 MW Gas Combined Cycle Power Plant at Yelahanka, Bengaluru. The last date for submission of bid was 15.02.2021. There were two bidders, namely, M/s Power Mech Projects Ltd.2 and O & M Solutions Pvt. Ltd.3
1 KPC Gas Power Corporation Limited
2 Power Mech Ltd
3O& M Solutions
W.A. No.749/2022
4
Solutions filed W.P.No. 19159 of 2021 and it has been allowed. Aggrieved, Power Mech Ltd. has preferred this appeal.
judgment and order.
W.A. No.749/2022
5
records.
4Andhra Pradesh Gas Power Corporation Limited
W.A. No.749/2022
6
12. The letter issued by APGPCL reads as follows:
“Dear Sir,
Sub: APGPCL-Vijjeswaram-Performance of M/s O&M Solutions (P) Ltd & authenticity of our letter reg. Ref: 1. APGPCL Lr. No.APGPCL/HO/MD/OMS/D.No.479/21, Dt.01.02.2021
2. Your Lr. No.CE(O &M) YCCPP/O&M/1906, Dt.04.03.2021 received on 08.03.2021
With reference to your letter (2) cited above, as per your request we are herewith furnish the following information.
1. The letter (1) cited above and in your letter reference is issued by the APGPCL on closing of M/s O&M Solutions (P) Ltd O&M contract.
2. APGPCL is not happy since they have not meeting the terms and conditions of O&M contract. Hence terminated by 31st March 2021.
This is for your favour of information.”
reads as follows:
W.A. No.749/2022
7
records from APGPCL called for explanation from O & M Solutions and the explanation was accepted. Thus, it clear that the KPC was satisfied with the explanation. The learned Single Judge in para 4(d) of the impugned order has rightly recorded that the satisfaction of the tender calling body is important and not that of the competitors nor the Appellate Authority.
KPC and it is purely executive in nature. Admittedly, the KPC
W.A. No.749/2022
8
has isssued the tender and knows what is the best for its Institution. It is settled that Courts shall not interfere with the decisions involving technical evaluations.
view taken by the learned Single Judge and accordingly, this
appeal is dismissed .
No costs.
Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
SPS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bid of O & M Solutions should have been rejected under Clause 10(c) of the tender given the termination of its earlier contract with APGPCL.
Whether courts should interfere with a tender calling body's acceptance of a bidder's explanation regarding past performance.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s Power Mech Projects Ltd
KPC Gas Power Corporation Ltd
Additional Chief Secretary, Energy Department (Appellate Authority)
O and M Solutions Pvt. Ltd
P.S. Dinesh Kumar
T.G. Shivashankare Gowda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court