Ms Psh Infra Techno And Adeco Jv vs The National Capital Region Transport Corporation Limited
- Court
- Delhi High Court
$~35
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision : 24.08.2026
# CNR No. DLHC010395862026
+ W.P.(C) 12305/2026 CM APPL. 56990/2026 CM APPL. 56991/2026
MS PSH INFRA TECHNO AND ADECO JV .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Anurag Chopra and Mr. Vardaan
Seth, Advocates
versus
THE NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION TRANSPORT
CORPORATION LIMITED .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Rajesh Katyal, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
V. KAMESWAR RAO , J. (ORAL)
CM APPL. 56991/2026 (for exemption)
1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 12305/2026 & CM APPL. 56990/2026
3. This petition has been filed with the following prayers:-
“i) Issue a writ, order or direction, especially a writ in the nature
of Certiorari for quashing/setting aside Clause No. 2.4.2(d) of
the NIT to the extent it mandates possession of an ‘A’ Class/EHT
Electrical Contractor License issued by the Government of
Haryana specifically in favour of the Lead Partner of the Joint
Venture;
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 12305/2026 Page 1 of 6
Signed By:MOHIT
Signing
Date:31.08.2026 17:29
ii) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the
Respondent to consider and open the technical bid of the
Petitioner after taking into consideration the EHT Electrical
Contractor Licenses issued by the Governments of Delhi, Gujarat
and Uttar Pradesh in favour of the Lead Partner, M/s PSH Infra
Tech Pvt. Ltd., as well as the ‘A’ Class Electrical Contractor
License dated 10.03.2022 issued by the Government of Haryana
in favour of M/s ADECO Energy India Pvt. Ltd., being the Joint
Venture Partner;
iii) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the
Respondent to Re-tender in respect of the present Tender
Enquiry;
iv). Issue a writ, order or direction, especially a writ in the
nature of Certiorari, quashing and setting aside the Technical
Bid Evaluation/Technical Summary dated 19.08.2026 insofar as
it declares the Technical Bid of the Petitioner non-responsive
v) Direct the Respondent to keep the Finalisation of Tender
Process in abeyance during the pendency of the present petition;
vi) Restrain the Respondent from proceeding further with the
tender process and/or awarding the work pursuant to the NIT
dated 12.02.2026, during the pendency of the present petition;
vii) Dispense with the issuance of advance notices;
viii) Dispense with the filing of certified copies of all Annexures;
ix) Permit the Petitioner to place on record the photocopies of all
Annexures;
ix) Award the cost of the petition in favour of the Petitioner; and
x) Pass any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon’ble
Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of
the present case.”
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 12305/2026 Page 2 of 6
Signed By:MOHIT
Signing
Date:31.08.2026 17:29
4. In effect, the petitioner is challenging the clause in the bid document,
which stipulates that the bidder must hold a valid ‘A’ Class/EHT Electrical
Contractor License issued by the Government of Haryana specifically in
favour of the Lead Partner of the Joint Venture. The tender in the present
case was issued on 12.02.2026.
5. The submission of Mr. Anurag Chopra, learned counsel for the
petitioner, is that the petitioner had, vide representation dated 11.02.2026 in
a similar tender having the same disputed clause, raised its grievance
regarding the restrictive clause and sought relaxation thereof. Further, a
representation dated 13.05.2026 was also submitted by the petitioner
requesting consideration of its bid. He states that the said representations
remained unanswered till 19.08.2026, when the bid was rejected as non-
responsive.
6. We may at the outset note that two writ petitions being W.P.(C)
11832/2026 and W.P.(C) 11833/2026, filed before this Court, involving
identical issues, have already been dismissed vide order dated 17.08.2026,
for the reasons stated in paragraph ‘7’ onwards of the order, which we
reproduce as under:-
“7. We are not in agreement with the said submission of Mr.
Sharma, for the simple reason that atleast on 06.02.2026, the
petitioner was in the knowledge about the restrictive stipulation,
i.e., Clause No. 2.4.2(d) that a bidder must have a ‘A’ Class/EHT
Electrical Contractor Licence issued by Government of Haryana.
Concedingly, the petitioner doesn’t possess the certificate as is
required in terms of the IFB.
8. Appropriate was, that the petitioner should have
challenged the validity of the said stipulation before the Court.
Having not done that immediately after 06.02.2026 and even
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 12305/2026 Page 3 of 6
Signed By:MOHIT
Signing
Date:31.08.2026 17:29
after 13.05.2026, it is too late in the day for the petitioner to file
the present petition incorporating the prayers of which a
reference has been made above, including challenging the
validity of Clause No. 2.4.2(d) of the IFB.
9. Moreover, we have been informed by Mr. Rajesh Katyal,
learned counsel for the respondent, that in W.P.(C) 11832/2026,
the technical bids have been opened and the petitioner’s bid has
been declared ‘non-responsive’. In so far as W.P.(C) 11833/2026
is concerned, the financial bids have also been opened and LOA
has also been issued to the successful party(s).
10. In view of the above, we do not see any reason to
interfere with the impugned action of the respondent no. 1,
accordingly, the petitions are dismissed along with pending
applications.”
7. Mr. Chopra seeks to distinguish the present petition from the
aforesaid writ petitions by contending that, in the present case, the
respondents neither responded to the representations submitted by the
petitioner nor took any adverse decision till 19.08.2026, when the technical
bid of the petitioner was rejected. It is, therefore, submitted that the present
petition cannot be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.
8. Mr. Rajesh Katyal, learned counsel for the respondent submits that
with regard to the present tender requirements, the queries raised by the
bidders with respect to the restrictive clause, i.e., a bidder must have a valid
‘A’ Class Certificate from the State of Haryana, were answered after seeking
clarification from Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited (‘HVPNL’),
which has insisted that the bidder must hold valid ‘A’ Class/EHT License of
Haryana to ensure that the contractor executes the work timely.
9. He also draws our attention to the documents, which have been put on
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 12305/2026 Page 4 of 6
Signed By:MOHIT
Signing
Date:31.08.2026 17:29
the portal, to contend that the condition with regard to the possession of ‘A’
Class/EHT License of Haryana was made clear to all the bidders, and it was
expressly stated that the bidders must follow the bid conditions.
10. From the above, it is clear that all the bidders were duly informed on
the portal about the aforesaid stipulation that every bidder must possess a
valid ‘A’ Class/EHT License of the State of Haryana must be strictly
followed.
11. If that be so, the submissions advanced on the ground that the
respondent did not respond to the representations of the petitioner till the
time of technical rejection of the bid, which has been undertaken only on
19.08.2026, does not impress upon us to entertain the petition.
12. That apart, we find from Annexure P-2 of the paper book, which is
the bid document submitted by the petitioner, that the petitioner has clearly
stated that it has downloaded the complete set of bidding documents
including all addenda/corrigenda/clarifications along with the set of
enclosures issued up to the deadline for the submission of the bid on the e-
procurement portal and having examined the same, they have no
reservations to the bidding documents including such
addenda/corrigenda/clarifications issued in accordance with the instructions
to bidders.
13. In view of these facts, we are of the view that the petitioner having
submitted the bid, pursuant to which it has been treated as non-responsive on
technical grounds, it is now too late for the petitioner to approach this Court
by way of this writ petition.
14. On the foregoing discussion and for parity of reasons, we dismiss the
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 12305/2026 Page 5 of 6
Signed By:MOHIT
Signing
Date:31.08.2026 17:29
present writ petition. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of as
infructuous.
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
AUGUST 24, 2026 / rhc
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 12305/2026 Page 6 of 6
Signed By:MOHIT
Signing
Date:31.08.2026 17:29