The High Court of Karnataka has ordered keeping in abeyance all actions in respect of a short-term tender invited for the ₹8,005 crore Sharavathy Pumped Storage and Hydro Electric project in Shivamogga and Uttara Kannada district, and directed all the parties to maintain status quo.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Krishna S. Dixit passed the interim order on March 11 on an appeal filed by Larsen and Toubro Ltd., Mumbai.
The company had questioned the March 6 order passed by a single judge, who had rejected its petition, in which the company had challenged that only 21 days had been provided for submitting bids for the tender instead of minimum period of 30 days for tenders exceeding ₹2 crore as per the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Rules, 2000.
Single judge’s order
Noticing that the rule empowers an authority, superior to the tender inviting authority, to reduce this minimum period for reasons to be recorded in writing, the single judge had said that the Board of the Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. Board had approved short-term tender by giving only 21 days to submit bids by recording in writing the reason as the urgency implement the project due to shortage of power supply in the State.
However, when the Bench took up the hearing of company’s appeal on March 11, it pointed that KPCL, even before the copy of the single judge’s order was made available, had on March 11 issued Letter of Award of the project to one of the three bidders.
As the single judge’s order was not available, the Bench said:“all the actions pursuant to the Letter of Award dated March 11, 20-24 shall remain in abeyance and the parties shall maintain status quo till the next date of hearing.”
Claim and counter
L&T had contended that tenders of this nature would require minimum 90 days period for preparation and the short duration for accepting tenders was fixed for the Sharavathy project “only to favour particular tenderers.”
However, it was argued on behalf of KPCL that “even today L&T has no eligibility to participate in the tender, as it has equipped with civil works and does not have experience in electro-mechanical and hydro-mechanical works. It is now wanting to partner with someone else but no one is coming forward. Therefore, the petitioner wants to stall the project.”
