Petitioner disqualified in technical evaluation of a tender bid for poor performance and misrepresentation sought judicial intervention. As an alternate remedy existed and an appeal was pending, the court disposed of the petition directing the First Appellate Authority to adjudicate with a personal hearing.
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.
[2025:RJ-JP:38761]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14541/2025
Spml Infra Limited, A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956 And An Existing Company Under The Provisions Of The Companies Act, 2013, Having Its Registered Office At 22, Camac Street, Block-A, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata 700016, West Bengal, And At 74A, Rajbhawan Road, Civil Lines, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Shalin Jain, Manager.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. Ankit Sethi with |
|---|---|
| Mr. Aman Manju | |
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. Kartik Seth,through VC |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Judgment
20/09/2025
The present petition has been filed being aggrieved of the unjust and arbitrary decision and actions taken by the respondents vide impugned purported order dated 25.08.2025, whereby the respondents disqualified the petitioner for the reason “ not considered due to poor performance and misrepresentation in previous work assignment of the RVUNL” in the technical
[2025:RJ-JP:38761]
[CW-14541/2025]
(2 of 2)
evaluation of bid despite having all requisite qualifications as per terms and conditions of the Tender/Bid of pipul project.
Mr. Kartik Seth, has marked presence as caveator and has submitted that the petitioner has alternate efficacious remedy available under the RTPP Act, before the First Appellate Authority. It is further submitted that on 23.09.2025, upon the said appeal, hearing has been conducted wherein, respondent has assured the Court that matter will be contested on the date so provided by the concerned Court.
In light of the alternate efficacious remedy being available and petitioner has availed the same and date is already fixed in the matter on 23.09.2025, and as per the statement given by the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1, this court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present petition with directions to Chairman, DISCOM cum First Appellate Authority to adjudicate the appeal after grant of personal hearing on 23.09.2025 at 11.00 AM.
It is expected that First Appellate Authority will follow the principles of natural justice and thereafter pass the order, in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the present petition is disposed. Pending applications, if any, also disposed of.
It is made clear that, till the disposal of the appeal, no work order vis-a-vis the bid shall be issued.
(SAMEER JAIN),J
Pooja/16
1 issue framed by the court
Should the writ petition challenging the petitioner's disqualification from a tender bid proceed before this Court, or be left to the appellate authority under the RTPP Act?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Spml Infra Limited
Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited
Superintendent Engineer (NPP), Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited
The Chairman (Discoms) Cum First Appellate Authority
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
