Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: Doubling Projects in Kec International Limited vs Western Railways, & Anr. on 16 February, 2023Matching Fragments
2. The facts, in brief, leading to the instant petition have been stated to be as under:
a) On 09.06.2022, the Respondent No.1, i.e. Western Railways, floated a Request for Proposal for ―Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) Tender for Civil Engineering Works of Doubling of Track in Mid-Sections between Dalauda (305.15 kms) to Ratlam (374.46 kms) Stations of Ratlam Division of Western Railway in connection with Nimach - Ratlam Doubling Project‖. The last date for submission of bids was 25.07.2022 and the estimated cost of project is Rs. 260.88 crores.
31. As can be discerned from the above, not only is the scope of judicial review in contractual matters severely limited, but in the field of public works, due deference must be given to the decisions of the State as the activities that are undertaken are of such nature that any delay or any hampering of the same can lead to an impediment of the country at large. The project in the instant case relates to the doubling of railway tracks in mid-sections between Dalauda (305.1.5 kms) to Ratlam (374.46 kms) stations of Ratlam Division of Western Railway. In a country where majority of persons travel by way of trains and transportation of goods also takes place via trains, it becomes tremendously necessary to ensure that such infrastructure projects are executed without any hindrance. The social and economic development of many small towns and cities in the country is dependent upon the access to such regions, and speedy trains are an impetus to such development. Until and unless there is in existence gross irregularity, illegality and/or arbitrariness on the part of the tendering authority, the Courts must stay their hands and not interfere so as to not end up obstructing the public works projects that are being executed in good faith by the State and are of national importance. It must be conceded that whether or not a bidder satisfies the terms and conditions of the RFP is a decision that resides with the authority inviting bids, and Courts must not needlessly interfere.