Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

may 2025

Delhi High Court · 2025-05-09

GLOMET CORP LLP vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation / case number
W.P.(C)-6198/2025 2025:DHC:3721-DB
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
GLOMET CORP LLP
Respondent
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6198/2025 & CM APPL. 28306/2025 GLOMET CORP LLP .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mritunjay Kumar and Mr. Mukesh Kumar Choubey, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shashank Bajpai, CGSC with Ms. Stuti Karwal, Adv. for UOI % Date of Decision: 09.05.2025 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA JUDGEMENT TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J (ORAL) 1. The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking quashing of the bid awarded to respondent no. 8 in relation to the tender dated 08.11.2024. The petitioner further prays for a direction to respondent no. 2 to consider the petitioner’s bid and award the aforesaid tender in favour of the petitioner, being the lowest bidder. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent no. 2 issued a tender on the Government e-Marketplace (GeM) portal, bearing tender number GEM/2024/B/5512350 dated 08.11.2024, for the procurement of Shotcreting Machine. The submission of bids was opened on 29.11.2024; closing date of bid submission was 07.12.2024 and; the last date for submission of bids was 26.12.2024. The petitioner, along with respondent no. 8, submitted bids pursuant to the said tender, and respondent no. 8 was subsequently declared the L1 bidder. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 6198/2025 Page 1 of 4 By:VINOD KUMAR Signing Date:15.05.2025 11:46:46 3. The petitioner states that vide letter dated 01.02.2025 addressed to the Director General of respondent no.2, it lodged a complaint regarding the participation of respondent no.8 in the subject tender, specifically raising concerns about their eligibility for exemption from submission of the Earnest Money Deposit (EMD). As pe

GLOMET CORP LLP vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS · Niyam