Delhi Metro: Supreme Court asked Delhi High Court to decide on Gammon’s plea on DMRC tenders

0
288

New Delhi: Supreme Court today asked Delhi High Court to “expeditiously” decide a plea filed by Gammon India Limited that it has “arbitrarily” been denied contract of a ₹600 crore metro rail project despite its financial bid being lower than the company which bagged it.

“The parties (Gammon India, DMRC, Centre and others) agree that the pleadings shall be completed before February 25. We request the High Court to commence the hearing on that day,” a bench headed by Justice T.S Thakur said.

It also ordered maintenance of ‘status quo’ with regard to construction and other works in pursuance of award of the contract.

The bench, which also comprised Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel, said the parties would not seek any adjournment of hearing before the High Court which would expeditiously decide the plea of Gammon India Ltd.

Earlier, Gammon India had moved the High Court seeking a direction to DMRC and the government that its financial bid, submitted through a letter on October 13 last year, be considered for awarding the contract.

The high court, which issued notices on Gammon’s plea, had however refused to stay the operation of contract awarded to M/s GYT-TPL Joint Venture.

Gammon India then moved the apex court seeking ‘status quo’ on the construction and other works in pursuance of award of contract to M/s GYT-TPL Joint Venture.

“The financial bid of Petitioner (Gammon India Ltd) is significantly lower than successful bidder. The successful bid of M/s GYT-TPL Joint Venture is ₹665.87 crores whereas the Petitioner has bid ₹639.49 Crores, ₹26.36 crores less than the successful bidder.

“There could not have been any justification for giving a go-by to the petitioner in light of the difference in the bid amounts…,” Gammon India alleged.

It also claimed it has been “effectively blacklisted” by DMRC by refusing to open its financial bid in connection with “DMRC contract no CC–87 by making allegations which are wholly unconnected with the subject tender without so much as a letter to the Petitioner to explain anything.”

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.