Shanti Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Odisha 2025 INSC 1295 - Writ - Tender Matters - Natural Resources
Constitution of India - Article 226 - Tender - When an authority acting under a tender misinterprets the tender condition that diminishes competition and deprives the State of its legitimate revenue, the constitutional duty of the court to interfere is beyond question. (Para 15) The court must intervene in a case of demonstrable misconstruction of a tender condition or irrationality which affects the public interest. When an interpretation of a tender condition narrows competition and excludes the highest bidder on a ground unsupported by law, the decision making process is vitiated. The interpretation of the terms of tender must, therefore, serve the object and purpose of the tender mainly to maximise the revenue to the State, when it deals with a natural resource. (Para 10)
Tender - A public tender is not a private bargain. It is instrument of governance, a mechanism through which the State discharges its solemn duty as trustee of public wealth. Its purpose is not merely procedural compliance, but maximisation of public value through a process i.e. fair, transparent and competitive. The obligation of the Tendering Authority is therefore twofold, namely, to interpret its own terms with consistency and to ensure that such interpretation advances, not defeats, the object of tender. (Para 10)
Natural Resources - Tenders and public auctions, specially for natural resources, are not mere commercial transactions, but an exercise in public trust. The State as custodian of natural wealth is obligated to secure the best value for public resources consistent with the principles of fairness and transparency. (Para 16) State must act to enhance and not diminish, the public exchequer in case it is dealing with natural resources. (Para 15)
Case Info
Key Details
- Case name: M/S ShANTI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. v. State of Odisha & Ors.
- Neutral citation: 2025 INSC 1295.
- Coram: Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Alok Aradhe.
- Judgment date: November 7, 2025.
Caselaws and Citations
- B.S.N. Joshi & Sons Ltd. v. Nair Coal Services Ltd., (2006) 11 SCC 548.
- Jagdish Mandal v. State of Orissa, (2007) 14 SCC 517.
- UFLEX Limited v. Government of Tamil Nadu, (2022) 1 SCC 1657.
- Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. v. Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., (2016) 16 SCC 818.
- Gujarat Pottery Works v. B.P. Sood, 1966 SCC OnLine SC 1268.
- Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd. v. S.L. Seal, (2017) 2 SCC 125.
- Aane Mines and Minerals v. State of Karnataka, 2019 SCC OnLine Kar 3791.
- Doiwala Sehkari Shram Samvida Samiti Ltd. v. State of Uttaranchal, (2007) 11 SCC 641.
- Subodh Kumar Singh Rathour v. Chief Executive Officer, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1682; (2024) 15 SCC 4619.
- Prakash Asphaltings and Toll Highways (India) Ltd. v. Mandeepa Enterprises, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1959.
- Michigan Rubber (India) Ltd. v. State of Karnataka, (2012) 8 SCC 216.
- Banshidhar Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., (2024) 10 SCC 273.
- TATA Cellular v. Union of India, (1994) 6 SCC 651.
- Natural Resources Allocation, In Re, Special Reference No. 1 of 2012, (2012) 10 SCC 116.
Statutes/Laws Referred
- Odisha Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2016, especially Rule 27(4)(iv); Rule 27(7), Rule 27(9).
- Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 139(1).
- Constitution of India, Article 14.
When an authority acting under a tender misinterprets the tender condition that diminishes competition and deprives the State of its legitimate revenue, the constitutional duty of the court to interfere is beyond question.#SupremeCourtofIndia https://t.co/lh2gO4g11S pic.twitter.com/4giXBy5m7i
— CiteCase 🇮🇳 (@CiteCase) November 7, 2025
