Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
The tendering process for the Dharavi slum redevelopment project was “fair, transparent and in the larger public interest”, the Maharashtra housing department has told the Bombay High Court after a plea challenged the conditions of the tender that was awarded to Adani Group.
A bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjay V Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep V Marne was told by Dubai-based Seclink Technology Corporation, which challenged the conditions of the tender issued last year by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority, that it was the successful bidder in January 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 impetus in 2016 when the detailed project report was prepared under the Devendra Fadnavis-led BJP-Shiv Sena government. In November 2018, the government approved a new model for the slum redevelopment. In October 2020, the Uddhav Thackerey-led government cancelled the tender and said new tenders would be floated soon.
Senior advocate Milind Sathe, appearing for the Dharavi Redevelopment Project, said the 2018 tender was cancelled and a new tender was issued by the government led by Chief Minister Eknath Shinde as a new plot of 45-acre land was found and Adani Group qualified for it.
Advocate Suraj Iyer, representing Seclink, responded that there had been no material change between the earlier and 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 and added that it had challenged only the tender conditions but not the tendering process.
“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 and transparent manner. No person has a right to do business with the government as a matter of right,” the affidavit read.
The government denied the allegation that modifications made to the tender were “illegal and mala fide”, and added that the tender conditions had been finalised considering the overall circumstances of the project.
Stating that the tendering authority was the “best judge to formulate the bid,” the government said the allegations were devoid of any particulars and merit.
The government 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 and in the larger public interest,” the affidavit stated and sought the dismissal of the Seclink plea.
Seclink filed a rejoinder to the affidavit. The bench will now hear the plea on March 14.
Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
