After SC nudge, MMRDA scraps tender process for Thane-Bhayandar mega infra projects worth Rs 14,000 crore
'We have decided to scrap the two tenders. The government will decide what they want to do,' Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for MMRDA, told a bench of Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justices A G Masih and A S Chandurkar.
Taking MMRDA's statement on record, the Supreme Court bench disposed of as 'infructuous' the pleas by Larsen & Toubro (L&T) Limited that challenged the Bombay High Court order of May 20. The high court's vacation bench had refused relief to L&T in its pleas challenging the opening of financial bids for the two projects.
'Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appearing for MMRDA fairly state that the state (MMRDA) has decided to scrap the entire tender process in the larger pubic interest and take such steps as are advised. In that view of the matter, petition is rendered infructuous and disposed of as infructuous,' the bench said in its order.
L&T had claimed that it had not received any intimation about the status of the bids, while other bidders had received the same. It had argued that MMRDA had initiated the opening of the financial bids by excluding L&T from the process.
Senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Singhvi, Ranjit Kumar, Neeraj Kishan Kaul, and advocates Raunak Dhillon, Madhavi Khanna, and Nihaad Dewan appeared for L&T.
The two projects are proposed to link Thane and Mira-Bhayandar. One of the projects consists of a 5-km twin tunnel of 14.6-metre diameter from Gaimukh to Fountain Hotel Junction at Shilphata, worth Rs 8,000 crore.
The other project, an elevated creek road bridge of 9.8 km, estimated to cost nearly Rs 6,000 crore, will connect Bhayandar with Ghodbunder Road in Thane. The two projects are part of an extension of the Mumbai Coastal Road project and the elevated bridge is likely to be the second largest after the Mumbai Trans Harbour Link (MTHL) bridge, also called Atal Setu.
MMRDA's decision to scrap the present tender process came after the apex court on May 26 and 29 asked the authority whether it was willing to carry out re-tendering process for the two major projects and had warned that failure to do so may lead to the court staying the present tenders.
The Supreme Court had said that it was difficult to comprehend that the technical bids of L&T, the company which was selected to execute the Central Vista Project in Delhi, had been rejected for the projects linking Thane and Bhayandar.
L&T had told the top court that MMRDA had arbitrarily declared Hyderabad-based Megha Engineering and Infrastructure Ltd (MEIL) as L1 (lowest) bidder for both the projects, despite its bid being at a substantially higher cost compared to that of L&T. The firm had argued that its price bid was nearly Rs 2,521 crore less than that of MEIL in the tunnel project, and Rs 609 crore less for the elevated road project.
However, MMRDA, argued that there were 'substantial reasons' for rejecting the bid and that it was not on 'flimsy' or 'fanciful' grounds.
On Friday, as Rohatgi informed the apex court that MMRDA was scrapping the present tenders, CJI Gavai said, 'Otherwise, if we go into the merits, we will have to consider the validity of that clause and everything.'
Rohatgi said, 'I conveyed to the government. I had a discussion with the government.' The CJI said, 'We are basically concerned with the larger public interest. The difference is Rs 3,200 crore… We live in an era of transparency.'
Though the petitioners also urged the bench to set aside the high court judgment, the CJI said it is not necessary. CJI Gavai told the petitioner's counsel, 'You should appreciate the fairness of Rohatgi and the Solicitor. At least at times.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Govt, UNDP ink pact to develop multi-level disaster management system
A MEMORANDUM of Association (MoA) was signed between the Relief Commissioner's Office of Uttar Pradesh and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in the presence of Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath on Wednesday. The agreement aims at implementing disaster risk reduction programmes, strengthening the state's institutional capacity and developing a multi-level disaster management system based on a technical approach, a statement said. Angela Lusigi, UNDP India Head and Resident Representative, was present during the signing ceremony. She also met the Chief Minister and assured that UNDP would provide all possible technical support to the state, a statement said. The purpose of this agreement is to implement a wide range of disaster risk reduction programs at different levels in the state, making the disaster management system more inclusive, accountable, and effective. Under this, various initiatives will be carried out, such as the development of disaster management plans at the district and departmental levels, risk assessment, strengthening of information systems, training, resource capacity building, establishment of early warning systems, and project management, the statement said. Key highlights of the agreement include the development of district disaster management plans for all 75 districts of Uttar Pradesh and departmental disaster management plans for 15 key state departments. Also, detailed project reports will be prepared for 10 state departments, and risk and vulnerability assessments will be conducted in 20 major cities, keeping potential disasters in mind. Urban disaster management plans will also be developed for these cities. On the technical front, the state's disaster information system will be strengthened and integrated. This will involve training workshops, assessment studies, provision of necessary ICT tools, and the establishment of a Project Management Unit (PMU) at the Relief Commissioner's Office to ensure all activities are well-coordinated and effective. For the implementation of this program, the Uttar Pradesh government has approved a total budget of Rs 19.99 crore over the next three years. The funds will be spent in a phased manner, and implementation will follow the technical proposals submitted by UNDP. The state government is advancing this program in line with the recommendations of the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), which has authorized UNDP to provide technical assistance in this field. CM Adityanath expressed confidence that this partnership with UNDP will help build world-class disaster management capabilities in Uttar Pradesh, the statement said.
Indian Express
7 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘GI proprietors can file suit': HC dismisses PIL by lawyers against ‘unauthorised use' of Kolhapuri chappal by Prada
The Bombay High Court Wednesday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) by six Pune-based lawyers seeking action against Italian luxury brand Prada for allegedly showcasing footwear resembling Kolhapuri chappal in its spring-summer 2026 menswear collection. A division bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep V Marne was hearing a PIL, which claimed that the Kolhapuri chappal was already protected as a Geographical Indication (GI) under the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act and is a 'cultural symbol' of Maharashtra. The court asked the petitioners what their 'locus standi' was, and what the 'public interest' was. It also asked them why the Sant Rohidas Leather Industries and Charmakar Development Corporation Ltd. (LIDCOM) of Maharashtra government, which was made a respondent, could not file the suit. The petitioners, among other prayers, sought direction restraining Prada from commercialising and using the 'toe ring sandals', claiming that the same was originally 'Kolhapuri chappal' and they cannot use the same without any authorisation availed from the registered proprietor or authorised users. The plea also sought compensation to the artisans' community for 'reputational and economic damages'. The bench orally questioned petitioners, 'You want an injunction in PIL? Let (the) affected parties file a suit. Why can't the proprietors of GI file it? You will have to tell us two things. What is your locus standi and public interest? Every person, whosoever is aggrieved by infringement of GI can take action in accordance with law. If you are an aggrieved person, do so. Infringement action cannot be decided in PIL. It will require evidence. It is not that the proprietor of GI cannot come to the court due to social or economic background that you (petitioners) have to espouse their cause. The proprietors can take their own action.' Advocate Ganesh Hingmire for petitioners responded that although they were not owners or proprietors of GI, they had worked for the community to protect their intellectual property rights, which were infringed due to Prada's action. Senior advocate Ravi Kadam for PRADA Group contested the maintainability of the plea, stating that the petitioners lacked locus standi (legal standing) to file it. He argued that the two leather industries or corporations from Maharashtra and Karnataka are jointly registered proprietors of the GI and have the right to file a suit for infringement in case the word 'Kolhapuri' is used in relation to footwear. After perusing submissions, the bench in its order noted that LIDCOM and Dr. Babu Jagjivan Ram Leather Industries Development Corporation Ltd. (LIDKAR) of Karnataka government, were registered proprietors of GI for Kolhapuri Chappals and 'they can bring an action against any unauthorised user for infringement' through a suit under the GI Act, if they believe PRADA unauthorisedly used registered GI. The HC said that such an action cannot be permitted to be agitated through PIL and that both the organisations were established to look after welfare of artisans and 'posses necessary wherewithal' for bringing action against PRADA. Dismissing the PIL, the HC also said adjudication of dispute on claims of similarity between two products and infringement required leading of evidence and same cannot be under through PIL. The HC clarified that the dismissal should not 'come in the way of registered proprietors of GI in Kolhapuri Chappal to initiate action against PRADA in accordance with law, if they so desire.'
Time of India
21 minutes ago
- Time of India
SC upholds Bengal's reclaiming of land allotted to HM
Kolkata: Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a Special Leave Petition filed by Hindustan Motors and upheld Bengal govt's taking back of 395 acres of land at Uttarpara. "This marks the culmination of a prolonged legal battle, during which the state successfully demonstrated that the land remained unutilised for several decades and that its resumption was in the public interest and in accordance with the law," said Debanjan Mandal, who appeared for the state. Earlier, the land tribunal had upheld the state's decision to take the land under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953. This decision was challenged by Hindustan Motors before Calcutta High Court, which on May 22 this year, rejected the appeal. You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata Fox & Mandal appeared on behalf of the Bengal, while Khaitan & Co represented Hindustan Motors. The apex court found no reason to interfere with the HC's findings. Incidentally, SC, in the process, also upheld HC's affirmation of the constitutional validity of an explanation to the proviso to Section 6(3) of the act, which formed the basis of the state's resumption proceedings. "The verdict reaffirms the commitment of the state to ensuring optimal use of land resources in furtherance of public welfare and industrial development," Mandal said. Last week, the state leased out 40 acres of the resumed land parcel to Titagarh Rail Systems to set up a coach manufacturing facility, augmenting the capacity of its existing adjoining plant.
