Ashish Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Ashish Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No quashing of the Committee's decision and no restraint on the tender process; instead, Respondent No.1 is directed to consider the petitioner's objection ('Annexure P/5') and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law after hearing all stakeholders, preferably within ten days of receipt/production of a copy of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Technical Bid Evaluation Committee validly declared the technical bid of Respondent No.7 (M/s RKS Engicon Pvt. Ltd.) responsive despite alleged overlooking of essential conditions - Clauses 4.2 & 4.7 of the CMBD, the prescribed credit-facility format and the competence of its signatory. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Respondent No.1 (Secretary, Rural Works Department) is directed to consider the objection filed by the petitioner and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law, after granting an opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders, preferably within a period of ten days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order.

Key takeaways

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ application stands disposed of.ratio¶32
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.ratio¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.363 of 2026, oral order dated 29-01-2026 (per Sudhir Singh, J.; bench with Ritesh Kumar, J.). The petitioner, a tenderer, challenged the Decision of the Technical Bid Evaluation Committee dated 16.12.2025 (Memo No. 3274 dated 17.12.2025) by which the technical bid of Respondent No.7, M/s RKS Engicon Pvt. Ltd., was held responsive under Notice Inviting Tender No. RWD/MMGSY (Awashesh-Gen)/HQ/ET/2025-26/07 dated 08.07.2025, alleging relaxation of essential eligibility conditions - Clauses 4.2 & 4.7 of the CMBD, the prescribed credit-facility format and the competence of its signatory. His objection ('Annexure P/5') filed on 22.12.2025 before Respondent No.1 was pending. Without adjudicating the rival claims on merits, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing Respondent No.1 to consider the objection and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law after hearing all stakeholders, preferably within ten days of receipt/production of a copy of the order.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.363 of 2026

======================================================

Ashish Ranjan, male, aged about 40 years, Son of Amar Kumar Singh, Resident of Ward No. 02, Vidyapuri, P.S.- Supaul, District- Supaul, Bihar.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar through Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

The Engineer In-Chief, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

The Chief Engineer-4, Purnia, District- Purnia, Bihar.

The Superintending Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Circle Madhepura, District Madhepura, Bihar.

The Nodal Officer, Mukhya Mantri Gram Sampark Yojana, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division Supaul, District Supaul, Bihar.

M/s RKS Engicon Pvt. Ltd., having its Head Office at Flat No. 302, 3rd Floor, Adya Niwas, Kavi Raman Path, Boring Road, Patna.

... ... Respondents

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Prabhat Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mr. P.K. Shahi, Advocate General For the Respondent : Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate Mr. Akash Anand, Advocate

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)

2 29-01-2026 In the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed

for following relief(s):-

“(i) Quashing of the Decision of the Technical Bid Evaluation Committee Dated 16.12.2025 as contained in Memo No. 3274 dated 17.12.2025 by which, ignoring the objection filed by the Petitioner, and relaxing the

Patna High Court CWJC No.363 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026 2/3

essential conditions of the eligibility, the Technical Bid of Respondent No. 07 has been held to be responsive.

(ii) Direction upon the Respondent to dispose of by a reasoned and speaking order before finalizing the tender, the objection filed by the Petitioner on 22.12.2025 against the decision of the Technical Bid Evaluation Committee dated 16.12.2025.

(iii) Restraining the Respondents from proceeding further and finalizing the tender process arising out of Notice Inviting Tender No. RWD/MMGSY (Awashesh-Gen)/ HQ/ET/2025-26/07 dated 08.07.2025 during the pendency of the present writ application and/or the without the leave of this Hon’ble Court.”

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the essential conditions of the contract, namely, Clauses 4.2 & 4.7 of the CMBD, as well as the prescribed format of the credit facility and the competence of the person who submitted the same, have been overlooked. Despite non-compliance with the said conditions, Respondent No.7 has been declared responsive along with the petitioner.

In this regard, the petitioner has also filed an objection vide ‘Annexure P/5’ before Respondent No.1, which is pending consideration.

Patna High Court CWJC No.363 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026 3/3

In view of the facts and circumstances of this case, Respondent No.1 is directed to consider the objection filed by the petitioner and pass an appropriate order, in accordance with law, after granting an opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders, preferably within a period of ten days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ application stands disposed of.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(Sudhir Singh, J.)

(Ritesh Kumar, J.)

Gaurav Kumar, Krishnakant/-

U