M/S Indraprastha Services v. Union Of India & ANR.

$~11 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 3101/2026 & CM APPL. 14956/2026 M/S INDRAPRASTHA SERVICES .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Ayush Gupta, Adv.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Rohan Jaitley CGSC along with Mr. Akshay Sharma GP, Mr. Dev Shahi and Mr. Yogay Bhatia, Advocates for Respondent No.1 Mr. Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva & Mr. Ashish Garg, Advs. for R2

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 07.04.2026 1.

The present petition is filed praying for cancellation/ withdrawal of the tender awarded by Respondent No.1 to Respondent No.2 bearing Contract No. GEMC-51168773897096 dated 02.12.2025 (Bid No. GEM/2025/B/6712650, dated 01.10.2025). 2.

The Petitioner is an unsuccessful bidder in a tender which was floated on 01.10.2025 for hiring 64 vehicles on monthly basis for a period of two years.

3.

The Petitioner does not challenge the correctness of award of tender in favour of Respondent No. 2. It prays for a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondents to cancel the contract awarded to Respondent No. 2 on the ground that Respondent No. 2 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2026 at 13:26:16

has supplied vehicles which were manufactured prior to 2023 and the vehicles are not in the name of Respondent No. 2 ('the successful bidder'). It is the Petitioner's contention that the terms of the contract have been violated.

4.

Learned counsel representing the Respondents submit that the complaint submitted by the Petitioner has been examined and found without merits. It is submitted that the Petitioner has given the list of vehicles belonging to the employees of Railways which were parked outside the office. He submits that the Petitioner has wrongly presumed the vehicles to have been supplied by Respondent No. 2. It is further submitted that even with regard to second grievance, the matter has been examined and found without merits. 5.

Keeping in view the aforesaid position, the writ petition is dismissed. Learned counsel representing the Respondents, on instructions, assures the Court that if any complaint is received in future, the same shall be promptly looked into and appropriate action in accordance with law shall be taken.

6.

In view of the aforesaid, no further order is required to be passed.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J AMIT MAHAJAN, J APRIL 7, 2026 "SS"

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2026 at 13:26:16