Patna High Court
New Hope AAS Construction Pvt. Ltd.,versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The writ application was dismissed as infructuous because the agreement had already been executed.
Summary
New Hope AAS Construction Pvt. Ltd. filed a writ petition challenging the disqualification of its technical bid by the Technical Bid Evaluation Committee and seeking certiorari and mandamus to declare its bid responsive. The petition also contested a clause requiring experience certificates contrary to departmental policy. The State of Bihar contended that a Letter of Acceptance had already been issued to respondent No. 8 and an agreement executed on 2 January 2026. The court held that, since the agreement had been executed, the writ petition had become infructuous. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with the court directing the petitioner to pursue any other available legal remedies.
Issues considered
- Whether the Technical Bid Evaluation Committee's decision to disqualify the petitioner’s technical bid can be quashed by a writ of certiorari.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the authorities to declare the petitioner’s bid as responsive.
- Whether the writ petition remains maintainable after the execution of the agreement and issuance of the Letter of Acceptance.
- Whether the petitioner has any other legal remedy in view of the executed agreement.
Subjects
- technical bid disqualification
- certiorari
- mandamus
- writ jurisdiction
- contract execution
- infructuous petition
- public procurement
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8841 of 2025
======================================================
New Hope AAS Construction Pvt. Ltd., having its registered office at- Flat
No.- 101, Sai Narayan Apartment, Opposite Piler No.- 59, Khagaul Rupaspur
Road, Hardaspura, Khagaul, Patna Bihar- 801503. Represented through its
director Nigam Bhardwaj (Male), S/o- Late Ram Keshari Prasad Singh, aged
about 51 years, resident of Flat No.- 101, Sai Narayan Apartment, Opposite
Piler No.- 59, Khagaul Rupaspur Road, Hardaspura, P.S.- Khagaul, Dist-
Patna, Bihar- 801503.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old
Secretariat, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Planning and Development Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. Chief Engineer, Planning and Development Department, Government of
Bihar, Vishweswaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
4. The Superintending Engineer, Local Regional Engineering Organization,
Work Circle- Gaya.
5. The Executive Engineer, Engineer, Local Regional Engineering
Organization, Work Division-1 Nawada.
6. Technical Bid Committee, through its Chairman-cum-Superintending
Engineer, Local Regional Engineering Organization, Work Circle- Gaya.
7. Mukesh Kumar Fathers name not known, having its address at Vill- Samai,
Post- Orahanpur, P.S- Mufassil, Dist- Nawada, Bihar.
8. Suryamani Father name not known, having its address at New Area, P.S-
Nawada, Dist- Nawada, Bihar.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Advocate General
For the Respondent Nos. 7 & 8: Mr. Pranoy Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)
6 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondents.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8841 of 2025(6) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
2. The following reliefs have been sought for by the
petitioner in the present writ application:
“1(i) That an appropriate writ/s in the
nature of Certiorari be issued to quash the
decisions of the Technical Bid Evaluation
Committee contained in Memo No. 125
dated 31/01/2025 (Annexure-P/9) whereby
and whereunder, technical bid of the
petitioner has been declared disqualified.
(ii) That, an appropriate writ/s in the nature
of Certiorari to quash the subsequent
decision of the Technical Bid Evaluation
Committee dated 11/03/2025, contained in
Memo No. 643 dated 11/03/2025, (Annexure-
P/11), whereby an objection filed by the
petitioner has been rejected by the Technical
Bid Evaluation Committee and affirmed its
earlier decision of disqualifying the
petitioner from Technical Bid and decided to
open Financial Bid.
(iii) That an appropriate writ/s in the nature
of Mandamus; directing respondent
authorities to declare the petitioner’s bid as
responsive, considering the facts placed
before the respondent authorities, by the
petitioner; through his representation dated
08/01/2025 as well as objection/complaint
dated 09/02/2025.
(iv) That for proper declaration that, clause
Patna High Court CWJC No.8841 of 2025(6) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
21(xiii) of the Notice Inviting Tender
(hereinafter referred as NIT) speaks about
the experience certificate, which is contrary
to the policy decision of the Works
Department of the Government, in order to
facilitate the newly registered contractor,
enabling them to participate in tender
amounting to rupees upto 50 lakhs, without
any experience certificate and for that a
guidelines have been issued.
(v) That an appropriate writ/s, order/s,
direction/s in the nature of Mandamus;
directing respondent authorities, to make a
detailed enquiry on the issue raised by the
petitioner, with regard to two responsive
technical bids, as the decision of the
Technical Bid Committee dated 11/03/2025
(Annexure-P/11) is completely silent not only
in present matter but tender of different
groups and surprisingly only two bids of all
the tenders are declared responsive.
(vi) That any other relief/s for that petitioner
is found entitled in law be granted to him.
(vii) For quashing the decision of financial
bid opened and decided with respect to
Tender Reference No. NIT-03/2024-25/E-
Tender/LAEO/WDGH No. 12”
3. The agreement dated 02.01.2026 shall be marked
Patna High Court CWJC No.8841 of 2025(6) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
as ‘X’ and made part of the record.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents-State
submits that the LOA has already been issued in favour of
respondent no. 8 on 12.07.2025 and, pursuant thereto, an
agreement has been executed on 02.01.2026.
5. Considering the fact that the agreement has
already been executed, the present writ application stands
dismissed as having become infructuous.
6. The petitioner shall be at liberty to avail such
other legal remedies as may be available to him.
7. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
( Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
U.K./-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.