Srinagar- Observing that the power of judicial review will not be permitted to protect private interest at the cost of the public interest, the High Court of J&K and Ladakh on Monday rejected plea challenging tender notice issued in June this year by Jammu and Kashmir Energy Development Agency (JAKEDA), seeking e-bids for the supply, installation and commissioning of grid connected rooftop solar photovoltaic power plants on Government buildings in the J&K.
While dismissing the plea, a bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal also referred to India commitment to several key international treaties aimed at combating climate change including the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), ITS Kyoto Protocol (KP) and Paris Agreement (PA) for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions and promoting sustainable development.
The court said that in alignment with these obligations, a detailed roadmap has been carved out for maximizing energy harvesting from alternate energy sources, particularly, focusing on renewable energy such as solar power.
“This initiative is crucial for meeting both national and international climate goals and ensuring sustainable energy development. These schemes aim to harness solar energy for both residential and Government sectors, thereby significantly contributing to the national and international climate goals,” the court said.
Referring to the records, the court said that various meetings were held on the direction of Prime Minister Office (PMO) for saturating the rooftop solar power plants on all Government buildings with a strict deadline for completion of the projects before December, 2025 in respect of large States/UTs and December, 2024 in respect of small States/UTs, respectively.
In this direction, the court said a decision was taken that JAKEDA shall implement a 70 MW Rooftop Solar Projects for covering 8792 Government buildings under the CAPEX mode and, subsequently a tender was issued on 12 June this year on the JK Tenders Portal for the Request for Selection (RFS) of bidders for the supply, installation and commissioning including warranty and Comprehensive Maintenance Contract (CMC) for five years, of Grid-Connected Solar Rooftop Photovoltaic Power Plants on Government buildings in J&K. It is this tender notice which was challenged by the petitioner, among others claiming that arbitrary, discriminatory and unreasonable technical eligibility criteria has been stipulated and that there is lack of transparency in the tender process and the exclusion of local venders, which contradict the principle of equality.
On the other hand, authorities submitted that the tender was issued pursuant to the meeting notice issued by PMO for “Saturation of Rooftop Solar” in UTs. They said the tender document of 70 MW was issued, which has been categorized into five categories (2 KW, 3 KW, 3-10, 10-100 KW and 100-500 KW) for obtaining rates, which is in conformity with the MNRE guidelines and orders.
After hearing both sides, the court reiterated that the power of the judicial review will not be permitted to be invoked to protect the private interest at the cost of the public interest, or to decide a contractual dispute.
“…insofar as the present case is concerned, this Court is of the view that no overwhelming public interest is involved, however, the only interest, if any, is private in nature and the reasons do not compel this Court to interfere in the matter which, if be done will be at the cost of public interest,” the court said and found challenge to the tender “ill founded and devoid of any merit.”
Given the financial implication on the public exchequer the court said that, it would not be in public interest to set at naught the entire tender process.
The court also observed that nothing specific has been brought to its attention that would reveal “mala fide or favoritism with respect to certain parties at the cost of the petitioner.”
“This Court is of the view that the conditions of the tender cannot be tailor-made to suit the eligibility of a party who is not eligible and such a party has no right to challenge the terms and conditions of the tender being ineligible,” the court said, adding, “The best person to frame the terms and conditions of the tender is the tender making authority having technical and administrative expertise, after considering all the relevant facts.”
Laying down the turnover and to test the financial viability of a party falls within the realm of the tender making authority, the court said.
“…in the instant case, the terms and conditions, which have been prescribed, are logical and sound in nature”.
The court also held that the petitioner cannot plead the cause on behalf of 31 other bidders, who according to the petitioner, have been ousted from the consideration zone, which is also factually not correct.
“The petitioner through the medium of the instant writ petition cannot espouse the cause of those bidders, who are not parties in the instant petition, as this petition cannot be given the colour of Public Interest Litigation, whereby the petitioner can be given a right to project the public cause on behalf of those, who have not raised any grievance before any fora or ever authorized the petitioner to project their cause.”
Follow this link to join our WhatsApp group: Join Now
Be Part of Quality Journalism |
Quality journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce and despite all the hardships we still do it. Our reporters and editors are working overtime in Kashmir and beyond to cover what you care about, break big stories, and expose injustices that can change lives. Today more people are reading Kashmir Observer than ever, but only a handful are paying while advertising revenues are falling fast. |
| ACT NOW |
| MONTHLY | Rs 100 |  |
| YEARLY | Rs 1000 | |
| LIFETIME | Rs 10000 | |
