PRAKASH ASPHALTINGS AND TOLL HIGHWAYS (INDIA) LIMITED versus MANDEEPA ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS

PRAKASH ASPHALTINGS AND TOLL HIGHWAYS (INDIA) LIMITED versus MANDEEPA ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS

The Division Bench erred in treating respondent No.1's quoted BOQ figure as a per day amount and allowing post-opening rectification because Clause 4(g) expressly prohibits any change to the BOQ template, Clause 5B(v) cannot be stretched to permit alteration of BOQ rates after bid finalisation, the BOQ as submitted showed the amount to be for 1095 days and thus was not an inadvertent clerical mistake, and the High Court failed to implead and hear the adversely affected appellant; accordingly the Division Bench order was set aside.

Parties
Appellant: Prakash Asphaltings and Toll Highways (India) Limited; Respondent No. 1: Mandeepa Enterprises; Respondents 2 4: State of West Bengal and its officials (Respondent Nos. 2 to 4)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Judgment by Supreme Court on Appeal From High Court Letters Patent Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned Division Bench judgment and order dated 23.02.2024 set aside and quashed
Legal Topics
Rectification of Bids, Bid Evaluation, Non Impleadment, Natural Justice, Public Interest, Judicial Review
Tenders Administrative Law Contract Law Constitutional Law Rectification of Bids Bid Evaluation Non Impleadment Natural Justice +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prakash Asphaltings and Toll Highways (India) Limited

Appellant

Mandeepa Enterprises

Respondent No. 1

State of West Bengal and its officials (Respondent Nos. 2 to 4)

Respondents 2 4

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Judgment by Supreme Court on Appeal From High Court Letters Patent Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Division Bench erred in allowing rectification of respondent No.1's financial bid by treating the quoted amount as a per day figure and computing the total for 1095 days
  2. 2 Whether Clause 4(g) prohibiting any change in the BOQ template bars post-tender rectification of BOQ rates
  3. 3 Whether Clause 5B(v) of the Instructions to Bidders permits seeking clarifications that would amount to altering BOQ rates after bid opening

Ratio Decidendi

The Division Bench erred in treating respondent No.1's quoted BOQ figure as a per day amount and allowing post-opening rectification because Clause 4(g) expressly prohibits any change to the BOQ template, Clause 5B(v) cannot be stretched to permit alteration of BOQ rates after bid finalisation, the BOQ as submitted showed the amount to be for 1095 days and thus was not an inadvertent clerical mistake, and the High Court failed to implead and hear the adversely affected appellant; accordingly the Division Bench order was set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned Division Bench judgment and order dated 23.02.2024 set aside and quashed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order dated 23.02.2024 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court in MAT No. 93 of 2024 set aside and quashed
  • Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are free to proceed with and finalise the award of contract in terms of the Notice Inviting Electronic Bid dated 17.10.2023