A contractor challenged rejection of its two BSNL tenders for laying cable pipelines, claiming it had uploaded an HDFC Bank solvency certificate with its bids. The court found no proof of timely upload and noted the successful bidder had completed over 70% of the work, so it declined to interfere and dismissed both petitions.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16737 of 2024
======================================================
M/S Trijal Constructions Pvt. Ltd. having registered office at Flat No. 202, Satya Ganga Apartment, P.S.-Shastri Nagar, Shivpuri, Patna-800023, through its Director Pratik Kumar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16833 of 2024
======================================================
M/S Trijal Constructions Pvt Ltd. having registered office at Flat No. 202, Satya Ganga Apartment, P.S.-Shastrinagar, Shivpuri, Patna-800023, through its Director Pratik Kumar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Patna High Court CWJC No.16737 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025 2/7
... ... Respondent/s
| ===================== Appearance : (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case |
================================= No. 16737 of 2024) |
|---|---|
| For the Petitioner/s : |
Mr. Apurv Harsh, Advocate Mr. Hritik Anand, Advocate Mr. Manu Tripurari, Advocate Mr. Raghu Raj Pratap, Advocate |
| For the UOI : |
Mr. Manoj Kr. Singh, CGC |
| For BSNL : | Mr. Harendra Prasad Singh, Advocate |
| For Respondent No. 6 : | Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Advocate Mr. Awadhesh Kr. Singh, Advocate Ms. Shyama Rani, Advocate |
| (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case | No. 16833 of 2024) |
| For the Petitioner/s : |
Mr. Apurv Harsh, Advocate Mr. Hritik Anand, Advocate Mr. Manu Tripurari, Advocate Mr. Raghu Raj Pratap, Advocate |
| For the UOI : |
Mr. Jawed Gaffar Khan, Advocate |
| For BSNL : | Mr. Harendra Prasad Singh, Advocate |
| For Respondent No. 6 : ===================== |
Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Advocate Mr. Awadhesh Kr. Singh, Advocate Ms. Shyama Rani, Advocate ================================= |
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 10-04-2025
We have heard Mr. Apurv Harsh, the learned
Advocate for the petitioner in both the matters and Mr. Harendra Prasad Singh, the learned Advocate for respondents No. 3 to 5. Mr. Rajendra Prasad, the learned Advocate has appeared on behalf of respondent No. 6 in
Patna High Court CWJC No.16737 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025 3/7
whose favour the contract has been awarded. The Union of India is represented by Mr. Jawed Gaffar Khan and Mr.
Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocates.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16737 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025 4/7
which is a certification by the HDFC bank that the petitioner owns an account where Rs. 17 lacs is parked.
This figure covers the solvency required for both the works for which the petitioner had filed his bids.
on the sole ground that the eligibility criteria specified in the bid clause with respect to work order and undertaking of the bidder's financial undertaking was not submitted at
the time of submission of the original bid.
the bids, the petitioner has brought on record a copy of the solvency certificate, issued by the HDFC Bank which is digitally signed by one of its representatives.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16737 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025 5/7
respondents No. 3 to 5 disputes that this document was filed along with the bid documents.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16737 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025 6/7
of solvency by the HDFC Bank, being the document which was required to be filed.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16737 of 2024 dt.10-04-2025 7/7
account, that the affidavit of respondents No. 3 to 5 clearly state that the solvency certificate, even the certificate by the HDFC Bank showing that the petitioner's account contains Rs. 17 lacs, was not uploaded along with the bid documents on the last date, as also the fact that respondent No. 6 has already been awarded the contract and more than 70% of the work has been finished by them, we do not wish to interfere in the matter.
petitions are dismissed.
(Ashutosh Kumar, ACJ)
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Rajesh/Bibhash
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| Uploading Date | 10.04.2025 |
| Transmission Date | NA |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's bid was validly rejected for failure to upload the required solvency certificate with the bid documents.
Whether the writ petitions should be entertained given the contract was awarded and over 70% of the work is complete.
M/s Trijal Constructions Pvt. Ltd.
Union of India through Ministry of Communications, Department of Telecommunications
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Government E-Marketplace (Gem Portal)
M/s Deepak Goel
Ashutosh Kumar
Partha Sarthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
