Summary
The employer’s acceptance of CRRC’s experience through wholly owned subsidiaries was upheld under the Nagpur Metro tender. Its interpretation of the government-owned entity provision was supported by the merger structure, expert evaluation and financing-bank concurrence. No perversity, bias or mala fides justified judicial interference; detailed fiscal and technical comparisons were left to experts.
Issues
- Whether the accepted bidder could rely on wholly owned subsidiaries’ experience without forming a joint venture.
- Whether the employer’s interpretation warranted judicial interference.
Held
- The tender owner reasonably treated the integrated government-owned parent and its wholly owned subsidiaries as one entity for the relevant eligibility clause. A consortium or joint venture was not necessary in these circumstances. (¶ 32–34)
- Courts review tender decision-making for arbitrariness, bias, mala fides or perversity and ordinarily respect a supported expert interpretation serving the project. They do not substitute their own technical or complex fiscal assessment. (¶¶ 24, 27–31, 34)
- The bid and corporate materials underwent expert and committee scrutiny with financing-bank concurrence. The accepted interpretation was consistent with commercial judgment and public interest on this record. (¶ 32–34)
Result
Appeals dismissed without costs; High Court decision sustaining the challenged tender acceptance upheld.