 "SC allows Gammon India to bid for upcoming 8 metro stations in Delhi")
The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday granted relief to Gammon India Ltd when it asked the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) to consider its financial bid for building eight metro stations in the national capital. Gammon’s rival civil engineering firm, GYT-TPL, may match the bid if it is lower than its own, the court said.
Gammon had moved the SC against a Delhi high court judgment upholding the award of Rs 665-crore work to GYT-TPL, a joint venture between a Chinese firm and the Tata group. The SC bench headed by judge T S Thakur modified the high court order, invoking public interest. The bench also said the high court judgment will not serve to blacklist Gammon in the current bids. DMRC gave an assurance on this, though it had earlier pointed out that the company had been blacklisted on previous occasions.
Gammon argued that it had completed 13 projects for DMRC and no infrastructure company could make such a claim. It said it was thrown out of the race on technical grounds, which was arbitrary. It added that when its bid was rejected, it was not shown why it was done. The rejection, it said, was the result of information collected behind its back, without giving an opportunity to defend the allegations.
DMRC and the joint venture contended that Gammon had suppressed important information in the bid documents, leaving certain columns blank.
They said it had not disclosed deficiency in the contracts in Chennai and Delhi; though it had become eligible by giving doctored information, it was found unsuitable by other criteria. Their counsel argued that courts should not interfere in commercial matters unless there was gross arbitrariness.
Gammon had moved the SC against a Delhi high court judgment upholding the award of Rs 665-crore work to GYT-TPL, a joint venture between a Chinese firm and the Tata group. The SC bench headed by judge T S Thakur modified the high court order, invoking public interest. The bench also said the high court judgment will not serve to blacklist Gammon in the current bids. DMRC gave an assurance on this, though it had earlier pointed out that the company had been blacklisted on previous occasions.
Gammon argued that it had completed 13 projects for DMRC and no infrastructure company could make such a claim. It said it was thrown out of the race on technical grounds, which was arbitrary. It added that when its bid was rejected, it was not shown why it was done. The rejection, it said, was the result of information collected behind its back, without giving an opportunity to defend the allegations.
DMRC and the joint venture contended that Gammon had suppressed important information in the bid documents, leaving certain columns blank.
They said it had not disclosed deficiency in the contracts in Chennai and Delhi; though it had become eligible by giving doctored information, it was found unsuitable by other criteria. Their counsel argued that courts should not interfere in commercial matters unless there was gross arbitrariness.