Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Administrative Orders - Orders issued by authorized administrative or quasi-judicial bodies in the context of procurement or bidding processes, primarily related to evaluation, eligibility, and qualification of bidders. These include decisions such as declaring a bidder eligible or not eligible, disqualifying bids, or passing technical evaluations ["2023 0 Supreme(Gau) 616"], ["2025 0 Supreme(Gau) 937"], ["2025 0 Supreme(MP) 498"], ["2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 3813"].
Orders Declaring Bidders Eligible or Not Eligible - Such orders are typically considered administrative orders because they are made by committees or authorities responsible for evaluating bids, such as the Bid Evaluation Committee or Technical Evaluation Committee. For example, the stand of the petitioner’s counsel that the State respondents could not disqualify the petitioner’s technical bid... is not acceptable indicates the order related to technical qualification is administrative ["2023 0 Supreme(Gau) 616"]. Similarly, the technical evaluation committee did not consider the bid of respondent No.2 to be responsive is an administrative decision ["2017 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 1340"], ["1999 0 Supreme(Del) 1062"].
Nature of Administrative Orders - Judicial review aims to prevent arbitrariness, irrationality, bias, or mala fides in such orders, emphasizing that courts do not assess the technical or soundness of the decision but whether it was made lawfully and procedurally correctly ["2025 0 Supreme(Gau) 937"], ["2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 3813"], ["2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 626"]. Orders related to eligibility, disqualification, or technical evaluation are therefore classified as administrative or quasi-judicial orders.
Order Passed by Bid Evaluation Committee - When a committee declares a bidder eligible or not eligible, or evaluates technical bids, such orders are considered administrative orders. For instance, the Technical Evaluation Committee's decision that respondent No.2's bid was non-responsive is an administrative order subject to judicial review for legality and procedural correctness ["2017 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 1340"], ["1999 0 Supreme(Del) 1062"], ["2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 626"].
Analysis and Conclusion:Orders passed by the Bid Evaluation Committee or Technical Evaluation Committee declaring a bidder eligible or not eligible are indeed administrative orders. These orders are part of the procurement process and are subject to judicial review primarily to ensure they are made lawfully, without bias or arbitrariness, rather than to assess their technical correctness ["2025 0 Supreme(Gau) 937"], ["2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 3813"]. Such orders are fundamental to the integrity of the bidding process and are classified as administrative or quasi-judicial in nature.
# Are Bid Evaluation Orders Administrative? Essential Guide for Tender ParticipantsIn the competitive world of and tenders, bidders often face critical decisions from —particularly orders declaring them eligible or ineligible. But what exactly are these orders classified as under the law? Are they ****, subject to specific , or something else entirely?This question arises frequently: *What orders are said to be ? Whether the order passed by Bid Evaluation Committee declaring a bidder eligible or not eligible is administrative order?* Understanding this classification is vital for businesses, contractors, and legal professionals navigating tender disputes. In this post, we delve into legal principles, landmark cases, and practical implications to provide clarity—while noting that this is general information, not specific legal advice.## Defining in Procurement are typically those issued during the executive or administrative decision-making process. They encompass functions like evaluation, approval, certification, or scrutiny within administrative or quasi-judicial frameworks. Unlike purely judicial orders, these involve discretion based on predefined criteria, such as . [
#AdministrativeLaw #BidEvaluation #TenderProcess
The petitioner’s counsel submits that the Bid Process Management Committee has only looked into the number of litigations involving the petitioner, without considering the fact that the respondent No. 6 could not have passed scrutiny of the Bid Process Management Committee, as the respondent No. 6 was ... The learned senior counsel for the respondent No. 6 submits that the Bid Process Management Committee has to not only evaluate th....
In this writ petition, an order was passed on 31.01.2025 by this Court, staying the operation of the Letter of Intent dated 15.01.2025 as well as the report of the Sub-Committee. The said interim order was extended from time to time and presently, an order of status quo is in operation. ... He has in fact, presented before this Court certain orders passed by this Court in the aforesaid WP(C)No. 179(AP)2024. ... The said Sub-#HL_STA....
No Committee shall be eligible to work beyond the term so specified unless the term is extended by order of the Board. ... M/s Paliya Construction was also becoming eligible but its bid was not considered, therefore, process is vitiated. ... 7.2 Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus to reconsider the allotment of financial bid and proceed with acceptance of tender of the eligible/qualified lowest tenderer/petiti....
Since the view of the Technical Evaluation Committee was not to the liking of the writ petitioner, such decision does not warrant for interference in a grant of contract to a successful bidder. 23. ... Rule 27 enjoins that the Tender Investing Authority should ensure confidentiality in respect to the process of tender evaluation until orders on the tenders are passed and the orders published in the tender bulletin. This is further r....
So it was not permissible for the respondent No.2's Technical Evaluation Committee to take the average turnover of the three years and then make the respondent No.3 eligible in the technical evaluation arbitrarily. 14. ... According to the said respondents, the "average" turnover for the above financial years relating to the respondent No.3 is Rs.816.75 crores and, therefore, the respondent No.3 was rightly held eligible, and that because of the interim orde....
Respondent No.2, it has been stated by Mr Sethi, submitted its representations, challenging such decision of the technical evaluation committee of the bid being non responsive, which representations were forwarded to the evaluation committee again. ... The recommendations of the evaluation committee was also uploaded on the website in terms of clause 2.19 of RFP which made it mandatory for the authority to display the result of the technical evaluation#HL_EN....
Respondent No.2, it has been stated by Mr Sethi, submitted its representations, challenging such decision of the technical evaluation committee of the bid being non responsive, which representations were forwarded to the evaluation committee again. ... The recommendations of the evaluation committee was also uploaded on the website in terms of clause 2.19 of RFP which made it mandatory for the authority to display the result of the technical evaluation#HL_EN....
Respondent No.2, it has been stated by Mr Sethi, submitted its representations, challenging such decision of the technical evaluation committee of the bid being non responsive, which representations were forwarded to the evaluation committee again. ... ... (II) Maintenance works are not considered as eligible project for evaluation as per Instruction NO.6 to Annex-IV. ... The recommendations of the evaluation committee#HL....
He contended that a writ court lacks the expertise to assess whether the rates quoted by the bidders were correctly calculated and cannot sit in appeal over such administrative decisions. ... In compliance with the order dated 24.11.2023 passed in WPA 26204 of 2023 and the order dated 30.04.2024 passed in MAT 2368 of 2023, the technical bids of ten bidders were re-evaluated, and a technical evaluation sheet was published on 23.04.2024. ... portions of those three #HL_....
It is by now well settled that judicial review of the administrative action / quasi - judicial orders passed by the Government is limited only to correcting the errors of law or fundamental procedural requirements which may lead to manifest injustice. ... and purchase order for Laptop under the said Yojana was issued on 26-5-2016. ... Once the process is found to be fair and reasonable, this Court is not required to step in further and to declare no interference in the decision of the ....
Undisputedly, it is only Government order issued by exercising power under Article 162 of the Constitution of India. What is administrative order or executive order is not defined anywhere. Administrative directions or executive directions are instructions or regulations issued by the higher authorities to the lower authorities, in the absence of a rule or enactment pertaining to a specific issue or to compensate or fill the lacunas in the existing laws and thereby constructing better standards or platforms to tackle issues. Executive directions are otherwise designated as ....
Wade says that the correct answer would be that they are both. Are these various orders legislative or administrative?” He says: “...there is an infinite series of gradations, with a large area of overlap, between what is plainly legislation and what is plainly administration”. He asks: “And what of ‘directions of a general character’ given by a minister to a nationalised industry?
He asks: "And what of 'directions of a general character' given by a minister to a nationalised industry? Wade says that the correct answer would be that they are both. Are these various orders legislative or administrative?" He says:" ...there is an infinite series of gradations, with a large area of overlap, between what is plainly legislation and what is plainly administration".
He asks : "And what of 'directions of a general character' given by a minister to a nationalised industry?. Are these various orders legislative or administrative?" He says: ........ "there is an infinite series of gradations, with a large area of overlap, between what is plainly legislation and what is plainly administration". Wade says that the correct answer would be that they are both.
If an order, bereft of reasons, is challenged in judicial review proceedings, the reasons for the decision may be placed before the Court. Unlike statutory or public orders or even administrative orders which have civil consequences, an order rejecting a bid/tender need not, in every case, necessitate a reasoned order being passed. The distinction, between failure to pass a reasoned order and a decision uninformed by reason, must be borne in mind. There is no legal obligation to record or communicate reasons for the decision, where the decision neither adversely affects ves....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
