TEHRI HYDRO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION versus ALSTOM HYDRO FRANCE & ANR.

TEHRI HYDRO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION versus ALSTOM HYDRO FRANCE & ANR.

The contractual disputes or rights between the parties cannot take precedence over the need to proceed with a significant public infrastructural project. Where allegations about lack of opportunity and non-responsiveness in bid evaluation arise, the process must be fair: all parties should be given a final...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Tehri Hydro Development Corporation; Respondent: Alstom Hydro France; Respondent: Voith Siemens Hydro Germany (Respondent No.2)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
26 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Supreme Court Order on Appeals From High Court Judgment and Related Transferred Cases
Outcome
Appeals and Transfer Case disposed of.
Legal Topics
Tender Process, Judicial Review of Tenders, National Interest in Public Projects, Transparency in Government Contracts
Public Procurement Administrative Law Tender Process Judicial Review of Tenders National Interest in Public Projects Transparency in Government Contracts

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tehri Hydro Development Corporation

Appellant

Alstom Hydro France

Respondent

Voith Siemens Hydro Germany (Respondent No.2)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Supreme Court Order on Appeals From High Court Judgment and Related Transferred Cases

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court was correct to direct fresh bids for the project;
  2. 2 Whether the rights of disputing multinational tenderers outweigh the national/public interest;
  3. 3 Whether the decision of the Corporation and/or Panel of Experts on bid responsiveness required further review

Ratio Decidendi

The contractual disputes or rights between the parties cannot take precedence over the need to proceed with a significant public infrastructural project. Where allegations about lack of opportunity and non-responsiveness in bid evaluation arise, the process must be fair: all parties should be given a final opportunity to be heard before a panel of experts, and then the evaluation and award must be completed by the appropriate authority in accordance with national interest, without intervention by the Court in determining the winning tender.

Court Disposition

Appeals and Transfer Case disposed of.

Orders

  • Panel of Experts to give all parties, particularly respondent no.1, a final opportunity of hearing on objections to previous expert report;
  • Panel of Experts to submit a fresh report by end of April 2010;