The Telangana High Court has allowed the tender process for Hyderabad’s Radial Road-2 project to continue, declining to halt proceedings while directing the successful lowest bidder to be added to a legal challenge filed by Sushee Infra and Mining Limited.
A bench led by Justice B Vijaysen Reddy directed Sushee Infra to implead the L-1 bidder, which has emerged successful in three project packages, as a respondent in the case. The state government and other respondents have been asked to file their counters within two weeks.
The dispute concerns Sushee Infra’s disqualification at the technical-bid stage for packages covering the proposed road from the Outer Ring Road at Kothwalguda, also known as Budwel, to NH-167N near Nacharam. The project is being executed by Hyderabad Growth Corridor Limited, or HGCL.
The three packages under challenge cover the stretches from Budwel to Shabad, Shabad to Gudur, and Gudur to Nacharam. Sushee Infra’s counsel argued that the successful bidder’s quoted price for the three packages was approximately Rs 600 crore higher than the rates quoted by the petitioner. The company contended that disregarding its bid could impose an additional burden on the state exchequer.
The government opposed interim relief, arguing that both technical and financial bids had already been opened and that the tender process had substantially progressed. Government counsel also submitted that judicial intervention could obstruct infrastructure works and relied on judgments of the Supreme Court and various high courts.
At the centre of the dispute is the validity of an experience certificate submitted by Sushee Infra. The authorities have questioned whether the certificates furnished by the company were valid, while the petitioner has maintained that the certificate met the tender conditions. The court said the validity of the certificate and the authority of the officer who countersigned it would be examined after the respondents filed their counters.
The court observed that issuing an order that stalled the tender process at this stage would not be in the public interest, particularly because the bids had already been opened and a successful bidder had been identified. However, it clarified that these observations were limited to the request for interim relief and did not amount to a final decision on the merits of the disqualification challenge.
The question of interim protection will be reconsidered after the successful bidder is impleaded. The court also said its directions could be modified if necessary and noted that the order remains open to challenge through a writ appeal.
