Although Bangalore has made a fixed waste management (BSWML) to continue its selection procedure on November 7, 2024 to deal with solid waste, the Supreme Court allowed suppliers who were either disqualified or rejected by their offers.
The Court also ordered the State Government, Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) and BSWML, which is a government company to carry out BBMP projects (SWM) to rework the time plan for the current offer and complete the outer limit of four months.
M. Nagaprasann’s justice approved the order and eliminated the dose of SRI Banashankari companies and other suppliers who have questioned the rejection of their offers and disqualification in the selection procedure initiated in 2022-23.
While some of the proposers of the contractual bodies were also looking for an interruption of the bidding invited on November 7, 2024, when these petitions were decided and wanted to continue the bidding procedure in January 2023 after remembling the first offer invited 28 August 2022.
Inflated offers
The Government and the BSWML During July-Sepember 2024, After Informing The Court, the Had Decided to Cancel Tender Invited in January 2023 Citing Excessively High Tender Premium Quoted by Bidders Rendering Initial Quoted Rates During 2022-23 Potentially Having Become Invalid and Changes Need in Tender Conditions for Timely and Effective SWM.
However, suppliers argued that authorities who remembered the bidding procedure and repeated them for extraordinary reasons, and the reasons expected to cancel the offer with a special reference to economic viability is a ruse to remember the earlier offer and continue their fresh offer. Some of the suppliers even wanted the court to assess earlier and now, and the reserve price then and the reserve price now.
Judgment of the peak of the court
The justice of Nagaprasanna, who quoted the judgments of the court of the court on the powers of the courts to interfere with the matters with someone, stated that the court could mainly interfere with the selection procedure if there was arbitrariness, but in the present case the court has not developed because no successful candidate has been informed.
The court stated that the annulment of the earlier offer was “based on healthy reasoning and does not suffer from tangible or demonstrable arbitrary”.
Published – 29 April 2025 21:55
