Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds WRD Tender: No Arbitrariness, No Favouritism Major Win For Chhattisgarh WRD: HC Dismisses Plea Against Sikasar-Kodar Canal Project Tender The Judgment is a Strong Judicial Affirmation that the WRD Department’s decision was Lawful, Reasoned, Technically Sound, Uniformly Applied & Free from Arbitrariness or Favouritism HC Backs Water Resources Dept: Tender Process For 522-Cr Pipeline Project Lawful & Sound “Cannot Rewrite Tender Conditions”: Chhattisgarh HC Rejects Challenge By M/s Offshore InfrastructuresChhattisgarh HC Dismisses Plea In Toto: Upholds Technical Disqualification & L-1 Bid In a significant verdict, the Division Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh unequivocally upheld the tender decision of the Water Resources Department (WRD) for the Sikasar–Kodar Reservoir Link Canal (Pipeline) Project. Hearing W.P.(C) No. 4026 of 2026, M/s Offshore Infrastructures Ltd. v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others, the Bench comprising Hon’ble Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal dismissed the petition in its entirety. The Court held there was no arbitrariness, mala fide, or violation of any statutory provision in WRD’s decision-making process. Tender Conditions Cannot Be Rewritten By Court The employer/tendering authority is the best judge of technical, financial and commercial requirements. Judicial review cannot substitute the Department’s expert assessment. Strict Compliance Mandatory The petitioner had altered the mandatory affidavit and failed to meet the financial eligibility of twice the estimated project cost. The Court said strict adherence to prescribed formats is essential in public procurement. Cannot Challenge After Participation Having participated without protest, the petitioner cannot challenge tender conditions after being technically disqualified. “A bidder cannot take a chance and question rules after adverse outcome.” Allegations of Favouritism Rejected No evidence was found to support claims that tender conditions were tailored. “Mere suspicion cannot substitute legal proof.” Expert Evaluation Respected The Court refused to interfere with the technical assessment of L-1 bidder by the expert Tender Evaluation Committee, citing no perversity or patent illegality. The High Court sustained: The financial and technical eligibility conditions framed by WRD The petitioner’s technical disqualification Technical qualification of successful bidder Opening of financial bid and declaration of L-1 Continuation of the tender process The judgment is a strong judicial affirmation that the Department’s decision was lawful, reasoned, technically sound, uniformly applied and free from arbitrariness or favouritism. Post navigation Congress calls Maharashtra’s Dy CM ‘Goongi Gudiya’:Slams Sunetra Pawar, Shinde labels it as an ‘insult to all women’ Farming will become more profitable through expansion of irrigation facilities, crop diversification and modern technology – Chief Minister Shri Sai
