Seclink Technologies Corporation vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another

ik-180612959 Bombay High Court 20 December 2024 • WRIT PETITION NO.4823 OF 2022 • 91 min read

Judges (2)

Amit Borkar Coram Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya Delivered

Counsel (21)

Ganesh & Co. Firm Wadia Ghandy & Co. Firm Abhishek Karnik Counsel Petitioner Aditya Mhase Counsel Respondent Atul Vanarse Counsel Respondent Bhushan Deshmukh Counsel Respondent Devendar Ailawadi Counsel Petitioner Jenil Shah Counsel Petitioner Jyoti Chavan Counsel Respondent Karan Bhide Counsel Respondent Kathleen Lobo Counsel Respondent Mandar Soman Counsel Petitioner Milind Sathe Counsel Respondent Rati Patni Counsel Respondent Ravindra Kadam Counsel Respondent Rohan Kadam Counsel Respondent Suraj Iyer Counsel Petitioner Vikram Nankani Counsel Respondent Vikrant Dere Counsel Respondent Virendra Tulzapurkar Counsel Petitioner Zal Andhyarujina Counsel Respondent

Parties (3)

Adani Properties Pvt. Ltd. Respondent Seclink Technologies Corporation Petitioner State of Maharashtra Respondent

Case Significance

Seclink Technologies Corporation vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another is a Bombay High Court decision dated December 20, 2024 (citation: ik-180612959). Seclink Technologies, a Seychelles company and consortium lead member, challenged the cancellation of a tender process and issuance of fresh tender for a major infrastructure project (Dharavi Redevelopment) by the Government of Maharashtra. The petitioner argued the fresh tender conditions were designed to oust it and suit a particular tenderer (Adani). The Division Bench headed by Chief Justice Upadhyaya dismissed the petition, finding no arbitrariness or irrationality in the State's decisio The bench comprised Justices Amit Borkar and Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya. The judgment was delivered by Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya.

Summary

Seclink Technologies, a Seychelles company and consortium lead member, challenged the cancellation of a tender process and issuance of fresh tender for a major infrastructure project (Dharavi Redevelopment) by the Government of Maharashtra. The petitioner argued the fresh tender conditions were designed to oust it and suit a particular tenderer (Adani). The Division Bench headed by Chief Justice Upadhyaya dismissed the petition, finding no arbitrariness or irrationality in the State's decision to cancel and re-tender, and holding the tender-issuing authority is the best judge of its requirements.

What was the outcome of Seclink Technologies Corporation vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another?

Seclink Technologies, a Seychelles company and consortium lead member, challenged the cancellation of a tender process and issuance of fresh tender for a major infrastructure project (Dharavi Redevelo...

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official India Courts portal.

Read on Indian Kanoon

Source: Indian Kanoon (ik-180612959)