‘Stopping ongoing work to affect facilities for pilgrims’
Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, June 9: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has refused to grant interim relief to Bhutani International Private Limited, which has challenged its disqualification from the tender process for hiring, installation and de-installation of prefabricated toilets and bathrooms along the Baltal route for Shri Amarnath Ji Yatra-2026, holding that interference at this stage could adversely impact a public project of immense importance and delay infrastructure meant for lakhs of pilgrims.
Justice M A Chowdhary, while hearing petition, observed that more than 80 per cent of the work had already been completed and that the principles governing grant of interim relief were not satisfied in the case.
The petitioner had sought quashing of the Minutes of Meeting dated May 21, 2026, through which it was disqualified from participating in the tender process, besides challenging the subsequent declaration of Gravity Facility Management Solutions Pvt Ltd as the successful bidder and the issuance of the Letter of Award dated May 26, 2026 in its favour.
The tender, floated through E-NIT dated April 24, 2026, pertains to hiring, installation and de-installation of 2,087 prefabricated toilets, 606 bathrooms, safe on-site and off-site faecal management systems, 40 soak pits for greywater disposal systems and cleaning, operation and maintenance of the same for Shri Amarnath Yatra-2026 on the Baltal Axis.
Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Syed Faisal Qadri argued that the Purchase Committee had arbitrarily disqualified the company despite the fact that it had disclosed all relevant information regarding previous tenders involving Tuljapur and Pune in Maharashtra.
It was contended that the matters relied upon against the petitioner already stood closed and that the authorities had failed to specify how the petitioner violated any condition of the tender notice.
The petitioner further alleged that while it had been excluded on the basis of adverse reports relating to previous works, the respondent had itself been blacklisted by Nagar Nigam Muradabad on August 12, 2024 and therefore ought not to have been permitted to participate in the bidding process.
The official respondents, however, defended the decision of the Purchase Committee, describing it as an expert body competent to assess eligibility and technical qualifications. The Government submitted that the contract related to a critical infrastructure project linked to the annual pilgrimage and that more than 80 per cent work had already been completed on the ground. Any injunction at this stage, it argued, would jeopardize completion of the project before commencement of the Yatra.
Counsel appearing for Gravity Facility Management Solutions Pvt Ltd informed the High Court that the tender process had already culminated in issuance of the Letter of Award and that execution of work was progressing rapidly. It was also contended that the petitioner had misrepresented material facts relating to its previous contractual performance.
During the hearing, the High Court examined documents relating to the petitioner’s performance before Pune Municipal Corporation. While the petitioner relied on a communication dated June 1, 2026 certifying satisfactory completion of sanitation-related works, the respondents placed on record another communication indicating that the petitioner had failed to supply toilets as required and that the remaining work had been executed through another contractor, M/s 3D Environmental Services.
The High Court observed that these conflicting documents would require detailed examination during the final hearing and that no definite opinion could be formed at the interim stage.
On the issue of blacklisting of respondent, the High Court noted that official records showed the blacklisting order issued by Nagar Nigam Muradabad had subsequently been revoked following an inquiry. As such, the High Court held that when the tender in question was issued, respondent was not suffering from any disqualification.
Holding that the petitioner had failed to establish a prima facie case, balance of convenience or irreparable loss, the High Court dismissed the application seeking interim relief. The main writ petition, however, remains pending and has been listed for further consideration on June 29, 2026.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
