In Banshidhar Construction Pvt. Ltd. vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., 2024 INSC 757, the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that the rejection of the appellant’s bid for failing to submit a Power of Attorney, while allowing another bidder to rectify a similar deficiency and awarding the contract to them, was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. Bharat Coking Coal Limited (BCCL) had issued a tender for coal extraction, and the appellant’s bid was rejected for non-compliance with a clause in the Notice Inviting Tender (NIT). However, another bidder with similar deficiencies was permitted to rectify its errors, leading to the contract being awarded to them. Aggrieved, the appellant approached the High Court, which dismissed the plea, prompting an appeal to the Supreme Court. Citing Central Coalfields Limited vs. SLL-SML (2016) 8 SCC 622, the appellant argued that any deviations from essential terms of the NIT must apply uniformly to all bidders. The Court agreed, holding that the unequal treatment breached principles of fairness and equality, set aside the rejection of the appellant’s bid, and directed BCCL to initiate a fresh tender process to ensure transparency and fairness.
