Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Limited vs. The Board of Trustees of Jawaharlal Nehru Port Authority
Background
Adani Ports had been disqualified from bidding on two Jawaharlal Nehru Port Authority (JNPA) tenders because an earlier concession agreement it held with the Visakhapatnam Port Authority had been terminated, which JNPA treated as a disqualifying event under a clause in its tender documents. Adani challenged this disqualification, first through a writ petition before the Bombay High Court (which was dismissed) and then through a separate writ petition directly before the Supreme Court, while also appealing the High Court's dismissal.
Decision Breakdown
By the time the case reached hearing, Adani no longer wished to pursue the two specific tenders (which had since progressed or been awarded) and instead sought only a declaration that the Visakhapatnam termination should not brand it as disqualified for future tenders generally. All parties, including JNPA and the rival bidder J.M. Baxi Ports & Logistics, reached a consensus. The Court disposed of the appeal on these agreed terms: Adani gave up any claim to the two tenders in question, and the Court recorded that the Visakhapatnam termination (which is itself still disputed in arbitration) would not be treated as a disqualification for any other future tender. The separate writ petition challenging the underlying tender clause was allowed to be withdrawn, with liberty for Adani to challenge that clause afresh before the High Court if needed, without being bound by the present order.
Lesson Learnt
Even in contested public-tender litigation, the Supreme Court will readily record and give effect to a negotiated settlement between the parties, and a company facing disqualification over a still-disputed contract termination can preserve its right to bid on future tenders through such a consent order rather than fighting to a final adjudication.