The tendering process for the Dharavi slum redevelopment project was “fair, transparent & in the larger public interest”, the Maharashtra housing department has told the High Court of Bombay after a plea challenged the conditions of the tender that was awarded to Adani Group.
A bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjay V Gangapurwala & Justice Sandeep V Marne was told by Dubai-based Seclink Technology Corporation, which challenged the conditions of the tender issued in 2022 by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority, that it was the successful bidder in Jan 2019 against Adani Group. However, the tender was not awarded following a decision to include railway land in the redevelopment project.
The project got an momentum in 2016 when the detailed project report was prepared under the Devendra Fadnavis-led BJP-Shiv Sena govt. In Nov 2018, the Govt approved a new model for the slum redevelopment. In Oct 2020, the Uddhav Thackerey-led Govt cancelled the tender & said new tenders would be floated soon.
Senior Lawyer Milind Sathe, appearing for the Dharavi Redevelopment Project, said the 2018 tender was cancelled & a new tender was issued by the Govt led by CM Eknath Shinde as a new plot of 45-acre land was found & Adani Group qualified for it.
Lawyer Suraj Iyer, representing Seclink, responded that there had been no material change between the earlier & the new tender as the railway land had featured in both.
The housing department stated in an affidavit that Seclink had no “vested right” to get the tender & added that it had challenged only the tender conditions but not the tendering process.
The affidavit read, “The Seclink has no vested right to get an award in a tender process. Any person who submits a bid can only legitimately expect that his bid is considered in a non- arbitrary & transparent manner. No person has a right to do business with the government as a matter of right".
The Govt denied the allegation that modifications made to the tender were “illegal & mala fide”, & added that the tender conditions had been finalised considering the overall circumstances of the project.
Saying that the tendering authority was the “best judge to formulate the bid,” the Govt said the allegations were devoid of any particulars & merit.
The Govt said that Seclink, which claimed the conditions of the new tender did not suit it, did not make any suggestions in view of the new tender notice, “chose not to participate in the process” but made “vague allegations instead”.
“The tendering process has been fair, transparent & in the larger public interest,” the affidavit said & sought the dismissal of the Seclink plea.
Seclink filed a rejoinder to the affidavit. The bench will now hear the plea on March 14.
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
0 Comments