INTIME VINCOM PVT LTD Vs. GAIL INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, seeking quashing of the cancellation of tender bearing no. GAIL/NOIDA/PMG/CS APPOINTMENT/PHASE VI/2023-24 dtd. 26/12/2023 for the Mumbai region and simultaneously seeking award of the contract in favour of the petitioner in pursuance to the said tender. Additionally, the petitioner also seeks restraint of the fresh tender dtd. 8/2/2025 notified by the respondent/Gas Authority of India Limited (hereinafter referred to as "GAIL").

(2.) Briefly, facts as culled out from the petition and germane to decide the lis are as under:-

(3.) Appearing for the petitioner Mr. Tanmaya Mehta, learned counsel at the outset contended that providing reasons are the bedrock of fairness and transparency in administrative law. He submitted that though GAIL has reserved unto itself the power to annul a tender at any time without assigning any reasons, yet, the same cannot be exercised arbitrarily or capriciously much less without assigning any reasons whatsoever. According to him, in a catena of judgments the Constitutional Courts including the Hon'ble Supreme Court innumerably have held that the tender issuing authorities will have to disclose reasons as to why a particular action which may be detrimental to the interest of the bidders has been undertaken. Inviting attention to the impugned e-mail dtd. 3/12/2024, he would contend that there are no reasons at all much less cogent reasons except that the "Tender for appointment of CS at Mumbai has been closed". In order to buttress the aforesaid contention, he relied upon the following judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgements are extracted hereunder:-