Supreme Court Orders Status Quo in ₹638-Crore Manipur Rural Road Tender Dispute
The Supreme Court has directed that the existing position be maintained in a dispute over 96 rural road construction packages worth ₹638 crore in Manipur, tendered under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY).
A Bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and R. Mahadevan was hearing a special leave petition filed by construction firm Nirbhay Construction against a September 17 order of a Division Bench of the Manipur High Court. That Division Bench had declined to interfere with an earlier order of a single judge refusing interim relief to the firm.
The Bench asked the single judge, before whom the main writ petition remains pending, to decide it "as expeditiously as possible", preferably within two months from the first hearing on merits. "Till the disposal of the writ petition on merits by the learned Single Judge, the respondents shall maintain status quo," the Bench said.
The dispute concerns two notices inviting tenders issued by the Manipur State Rural Roads Development Agency — one covering 55 work packages and the other 41, taking the total to 96. The High Court recorded the total project cost at ₹638 crore.
Nirbhay Construction, represented by advocates Prashant Bhushan and Neha Rathi, has alleged that a rival bidder, Bhartia Infra Projects Limited (BIPL), furnished false and fabricated documents relating to its technical qualifications and should have been disqualified under the conditions governing the tender. According to the petition, BIPL was subsequently issued Letters of Acceptance for 84 of the 96 packages — 48 under one tender and 36 under the other.
Among the discrepancies flagged by the petitioner were affidavits showing the same individual holding two positions simultaneously, different signatures attributed to the same person, and claims about the experience of personnel that it describes as implausible. The petition specifically referred to a supervisor whose affidavit claimed eight years of experience in civil construction, while the Class X certificate accompanying the bid related to the 2021 examination. It also raised questions over documents concerning equipment and an invoice and cash receipt for about ₹9.57 crore.
Nirbhay Construction lodged a complaint on September 3, after the technical evaluation of the bids. Clause 22.6 of the Instructions to Bidders allowed bidders five working days after publication of the technical evaluation results to submit complaints, and required such complaints to be "considered for resolution" before the financial bids were opened. The financial bids were subsequently opened, and Letters of Acceptance were issued to successful bidders.
A single judge of the Manipur High Court had earlier refused interim relief, observing that the technical bid had been evaluated by technical experts and that the court does not sit in appeal over their opinion. A Division Bench then declined to interfere, noting that the petitioner's September 3 complaint had been considered on September 10, before the financial bids were opened, and finding that the tender conditions governing consideration of complaints had been complied with. It also took into account the public importance of the road projects and a September 30 cut-off for the funds, after which they could lapse, and concluded that it would not be in the public interest to interfere with the tender process at that stage.
The Supreme Court's order does not amount to a finding on the merits of the allegations, which remain to be examined by the single judge. The PMGSY is a centrally sponsored scheme aimed at providing all-weather road connectivity to unconnected habitations in rural areas.
