SC Slams MMRDA Over L&T Bid Row
• Mumbai Mega Projects Face Supreme Scrutiny
• L&T Out, Megha In—SC Smells Trouble
• Re-Tender or Face Stay, SC Warns MMRDA
Unmesh Gujarathi
Sprouts News Exclusive
Contact: +91 9322755098
Sprouts News Exclusive
Contact: +91 9322755098
Contents
SC Slams MMRDA Over L&T Bid Row• Mumbai Mega Projects Face Supreme Scrutiny• L&T Out, Megha In—SC Smells Trouble• Re-Tender or Face Stay, SC Warns MMRDAL&T Alleges Arbitrary Rejection and Loss to Public FundsTransparency, Public Interest, and Legal Precedents Under ScrutinySprouts News: Mumbai Infra Bidding Dispute Enters Critical PhaseProject Overview: Key Infrastructure for Mumbai’s Growth CorridorAlso Read: Medical Scandal: DY Patil Medical College in DRP Storm.Megha Engineering’s Nexus with TV9 Sparks Ethical ConcernsSprouts News Calls for Immediate Ban on TV9
The Supreme Court questioned MMRDA’s rejection of L&T’s bids for Mumbai’s Rs 14,000 crore infrastructure projects, citing transparency and public interest concerns. It warned of a stay unless re-tendered. L&T alleges arbitrary disqualification, with lower bids than Megha Engineering. The matter will be heard next on May 29.
In a high-stakes hearing on Monday, the Supreme Court expressed serious concern over the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority’s (MMRDA) decision to disqualify Larsen and Toubro (L&T) from two marquee infrastructure projects. These include the Rs 6,000 crore Mumbai Elevated Road Project and the Rs 8,000 crore Road Tunnel Project.
L&T, a firm entrusted with the prestigious Central Vista redevelopment, was disqualified on technical grounds, leading the Supreme Court to question the legitimacy of the bidding process. Chief Justice of India B. R. Gavai, heading the two-judge bench, remarked: “It’s difficult to believe that someone chosen for Central Vista was disqualified here. Either re-tender or we will stay the process.”
MMRDA’s counsel, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, and Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi were directed to seek instructions on whether the authority would consider re-tendering. The next hearing is scheduled for May 29.
L&T Alleges Arbitrary Rejection and Loss to Public Funds
L&T challenged the Bombay High Court’s twin orders from May 20, which upheld MMRDA’s decision not to disclose reasons for rejecting the firm’s technical bids. Represented by Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, L&T contended that it was denied a fair opportunity and was not informed of its disqualification in advance.
According to L&T, the non-transparent tender process led to the selection of Megha Engineering & Infrastructure Ltd as the lowest (L1) bidder at a significantly higher cost. The company estimates its bid was approximately Rs 2,521 crore lower in the tunnel project and Rs 609 crore lower in the elevated road project. These figures raise serious questions about public fund management and transparency.
Transparency, Public Interest, and Legal Precedents Under Scrutiny
The Supreme Court, in a pointed exchange, emphasized that the issue isn’t just technical compliance but also public interest and transparency. “We are in an era of transparency. If it’s arbitrary, the person should have an opportunity to challenge,” remarked CJI Gavai.
Rohatgi argued that disqualified bidders lose standing to raise cost concerns, but the court disagreed. CJI Gavai insisted that saving public money is paramount: “You better take instructions. Public money would be saved.”
MMRDA defended its stance, citing clauses from previous Supreme Court rulings allowing reasons for disqualification to be revealed post-award in select cases. However, Singhvi countered that those precedents were applicable to foreign-funded tenders, not domestic infrastructure works such as these.
Sprouts News: Mumbai Infra Bidding Dispute Enters Critical Phase
The legal battle has captured the attention of policymakers and infrastructure stakeholders alike. Sprouts News has learned that MMRDA retained L&T’s price bids in a sealed envelope and did not open them—a move questioned by Singhvi, who said, “I know my price.”
As the dispute unfolds, Sprouts News will continue tracking this developing story that sits at the intersection of infrastructure governance, transparency, and judicial oversight.
The bench’s remarks suggest discomfort with what they perceive as a fait accompli strategy by MMRDA—moving forward with contract awards while challenges remain under review. The court explicitly warned against using such procedural tactics to avoid judicial scrutiny.
Project Overview: Key Infrastructure for Mumbai’s Growth Corridor
The Elevated Road Project involves constructing a 9.80 km bridge along the Vasai Creek. It forms part of a broader MMRDA initiative to extend the Mumbai Coastal Road network. This includes a planned 15-km road stretch connecting Gaimukh in Thane to Bhayander—critical to decongesting Mumbai’s northern corridor.
The Road Tunnel Project, valued at approximately Rs 8,000 crore, is designed to enhance urban connectivity through an underground transit solution—an engineering challenge of immense scale. These are among MMRDA’s most capital-intensive infrastructure undertakings and carry long-term implications for mobility and regional development.
Sprouts News will report the outcome of the next Supreme Court hearing on May 29, which could determine whether the MMRDA must reissue tenders or face a judicial stay on project execution.
Also Read: Medical Scandal: DY Patil Medical College in DRP Storm.
Megha Engineering’s Nexus with TV9 Sparks Ethical Concerns
Serious allegations have emerged against Megha Engineering & Infrastructure Ltd (MEIL) for allegedly misusing the influential media platform TV9 to whitewash its corrupt practices and suppress public dissent. Sources close to Sprouts News have revealed that TV9, which is owned by a parent company closely tied to Megha Engineering’s interests, has selectively broadcasted favorable content while deliberately ignoring controversies and legal battles involving the company—especially in multi-crore government infrastructure contracts. This manipulation of public opinion through biased reporting undermines journalistic integrity and poses a direct threat to media neutrality in India.
Sprouts News Calls for Immediate Ban on TV9
In light of these disturbing developments, Sprouts News strongly demands a nationwide ban on TV9 News Channel, calling it a dangerous tool of corporate propaganda. The parent entity behind TV9 is itself under scrutiny for fraudulent operations and financial irregularities, raising serious questions about the channel’s editorial independence and ethical foundations. Allowing such compromised entities to operate unchecked not only misleads the public but also erodes democratic institutions that depend on a free and fair press. Sprouts News urges media regulatory bodies and lawmakers to launch a thorough investigation and take swift action against both the channel and its parent company.
