Newdelhi, Oct 9, 2026: The Allahabad High Court has ruled that once a government agency is appointed for a project and initiates the tendering process, it should not be replaced midway without compelling reasons, as such actions can negatively impact the rights of participating bidders. The bench emphasized that every administrative action by the state must remain just, fair, and reasonable.
The observation was issued during the consideration of a writ petition filed by Uttar Pradesh resident Om Prakash Mishra, who challenged the cancellation of a road construction tender initially floated by the Provincial Division of the Public Works Department in Gonda. The state government had subsequently decided to reassign the project to the Rural Engineering Department instead.
A bench comprising Justices Alok Mathur and Amitabh Kumar Rai noted that while the state holds the authority to choose the executing agency, altering that decision mid-process without cogent justification infringes upon the rights of participants. The judges noted that government actions must adhere strictly to fairness.
The petitioner's legal representatives informed the court that Mishra had actively participated in the tender process for constructing a specific link road in Gonda. However, before the selection could be finalized, the process was scrapped following an official government order dated July 31, which reasoned that the work fell under regional development and belonged under the purview of the Rural Engineering Department.
The petitioner argued that the transfer was driven by mala fide intentions at the urging of the local Member of the Legislative Assembly from Mehnon, maintaining there were no faults in the original PWD tender process. State counsel countered by presenting instructions from the PWD executive engineer confirming the state's decision to shift the project.
Upon reviewing the arguments, the high court found no valid justification for transferring the project while the tender was already active and bidders were involved. The bench pointed to record evidence indicating the government order was issued promptly following letters from the local MLA, suggesting a prima facie lack of independent cogent reasoning and a potentially mala fide approach.
The court directed state authorities to submit their formal replies within a three-week window and scheduled the next hearing for November 25. In its interim order issued on October 7, the bench stayed the implementation of the July 31 government order and the subsequent August 1 tender cancellation notice, ruling that the contract cannot be awarded to another party without judicial permission while permitting the state to allow the PWD to resume the original tender process.