M/S Khaira Tourist Service v. Union Of India & ANR.
$~232 & 234 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (232) + W.P.(C) 19424/2025, CM APPL. 80960/2025 & CM APPL. 80961/2025 M/S KHAIRA TOURIST SERVICE .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Ayush Gupta and Ms. Prerna Chaturvedi, Advocates.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. Shashank Dixit, CGSC with Mr.
Kunal Raj, Advocates.
Mr. Sarvesh P. Shrivastava, GP for UOI.
(234) + W.P.(C) 19453/2025, CM APPL. 81135/2025 & CM APPL. 81136/2025 MS IP TRAVEL LINES AND ANOTHER .....Petitioners Through:
Dr. Ankit Gupta, Ms. Minakshi Goyal and Mr. Mukul Rana, Advocates.
versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS .....Respondents Through:
Ms. Nidhi Raman, CGSC with Mr.
Arnav Mittal, GP and Mr. Akash Mishra, Advocate for R-1/UOI.
Mr.
Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva, Advocates for R-3 and 4.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
O R D E R
% 22.12.2025 W.P.(C) 19424/2025 & W.P.(C) 19453/2025 Page 1 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
1.
Present writ petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, seeking a direction to the respondents to award the tenders dated 07.08.2025 and 05.08.2025 in favour of the successful bidders, i.e. the petitioners herein, and further seek a direction restraining the respondents from awarding or allotting the tenders to any bidder other than the petitioners.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners invites the attention of this Court to the disqualification of the petitioners for the tender dated 07.08.2025 on the grounds that in W.P(C) 19424/2025, the petitioners were remarked as "Disqualified (i) - Statutory Non-compliant: The financial bid is disqualified on grounds of Statutory Non-compliant" and W.P.(C) 19453/2025, as - "Disqualified (i) Abnormally Low Rate: The Financial bid is disqualified on grounds of Abnormally Low Rate".
3.
The primary grievance of the petitioners is the non-supply of reasons for disqualification.
4.
We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. 5.
It is settled law that adminstrative action should be predicated on reasons. Though the orders which may be passed may not be akin to judicial pronouncements, yet, reasons ordinarily form the bedrock of any action taken by the administrative authorities.
6.
Keeping in view the fact that the rejection/disqualification does not disclose the reasons for rejection, we deem it appropriate to direct that these writ petitions may be treated as representations and shall be disposed of by the competent authority of the respondents by way of a speaking order within 10 days from today. Any such speaking order/decision shall be furnished forthwith to the petitioners. The petitioners, if so, aggrieved by the decision rendered by the authority, would be at liberty to approach this Court in accordance with law.
W.P.(C) 19424/2025 & W.P.(C) 19453/2025 Page 2 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
7.
In view of the aforesaid, the present petitions alongwith the pending applications stand disposed of.
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J DECEMBER 22, 2025 rl W.P.(C) 19424/2025 & W.P.(C) 19453/2025 Page 3 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.