MAHA MINERAL MINING & BENEFICATION PVT. LTD. versus MADHYA PRADESH POWER GENERATING CO. LTD. & ANR.

Citation: [2025] 9 S.C.R. 528 · Decided: 09-09-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SURYA KANT, JOYMALYA BAGCHI · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 9 S.C.R. 528 : 2025 INSC 1085
Maha Mineral Mining & Benefication Pvt. Ltd. 
v. 
Madhya Pradesh Power Generating Co. Ltd. & Anr.
(Civil Appeal No. 11726 of 2025)
09 September 2025
[Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Issue arose whether the decision of the High Court to uphold 
the appellant-bidder’s disqualification under Clause 5(D) for not 
furnishing Joint Venture agreement justified; and whether the 
appellant would have stood disqualified since its washeries had 
been exclusively committed to the State Mining Corporation.
Headnotes†
Tender – Notice inviting tender – Clause (5)D and Clause (5)B –  
Disqualification – 1st respondent invited Tender for coal 
beneficiation and managing logistics for Thermal Power 
Project – Appellant and others submitted their bid – However, 
the appellant-bidder was disqualified during technical 
evaluation by the Committee due to non-submission of 
credentials as per Clause No.(5)D of the NIT-non-filing of Joint 
Venture agreement – Decision of the Committee challenged by 
the appellant – High Court upheld the disqualification of the 
appellant by the Committee for non-compliance of Clause 5(D) 
of the NIT and also held that even if the JV agreement had 
been submitted, the appellant would have stood disqualified 
since its washeries had been exclusively committed to the 
State Mining Corporation – Correctness:
Held: 1st respondent acted contrary to the terms of the NIT and 
unfairly rejected the appellant’s bid for non-production of JV 
agreement although Clause 5(D) did not prescribe production of 
such agreement as mandatory to rely on past-experience of such 
consortium in which the bidder had a defined proportionate share – 
Decision of the Committee, upheld by the High Court as per Clause 
5(D) liable to be set aside – Issue as regards washery capacity is 
a contentious one and ought not to have been decided by the High 
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 
529
Maha Mineral Mining & Benefication Pvt. Ltd. v.  
Madhya Pradesh Power Generating Co. Ltd. & Anr.
Court without giving opportunity to the appellant to controvert the 
same – High Court also lost sight of the fact that the Committee 
had not adverted to this issue and it was impermissible for it to 
travel beyond the reasons given by the Committee and disqualify 
the appellant – Allotment of work order to 2nd respondent has been 
made subject to the outcome of this proceeding – Matter remand 
for a fresh consideration whether appellant had requisite spare 
washing capacity as per Clause 5(B) of the NIT and the validity 
of the work order in favour of the 2nd respondent in light of such 
decision – Impugned judgment and order of the High Court set 
aside. [Paras 20, 21, 24-26]
List of Keywords
Disqualification; Clause 5(D) of the NIT; Non furnishing JV 
agreement; Washeries; Tender; Notice inviting tender; Clause 
(5)B of the NIT; Coal beneficiation and managing logistics for 
Thermal Power Project; Technical evaluation by the Committee; 
Non-submission of credentials; Joint Venture agreement; State 
Mining Corporation.
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 11726  
of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 06.01.2025 of the High Court 
of Madhya Pradesh Principal Seat at Jabalpur in WP No. 18286 
of 2024
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellants:
Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv., Gagan Sanghi, Mrs. Farah Hashmi, 
Santosh Ghate, Rameshwar Prasad Goyal.
Advs. for the Respondents:
Bijender Chahar, A.S.G., Shyam Divan, Balbir Singh, Arpan Pawar, 
Sr. Advs., Kartik Seth, Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, Nikhil Nasre, Raghav 
Sharma, Ms. Aditi Mishra, K.M Abish, Manan, Ms. Shrika Gautam, 
Himanshu Satija, Harsh Saxena, Chiranjeev Sharma, Pulkit Pawar, 
Mrs. Neha Mehta Satija.
530
[2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
1.	
Leave granted.
Factual Matrix
2.	
In response to Notice Inviting Tender1 dated 17.05.2024, issued 
by the 1st respondent for the purpose of run-of-mine (ROM) coal 
beneficiation and managing logistics from Western Coalfields Ltd.2 
(Nagpur area) sources for Shree Singaji Thermal Power Project, 
Khandwa (Madhya Pradesh), the appellant and two others, namely 
the 2nd respondent3 and one M/s NN Global Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. had 
submitted their bid.
3.	
As NN Global Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. could not furnish earnest money 
deposit, only the appellant and the 2nd respondent remained in 
the fray. On 04.07.2024, the Tender Evaluation Committee4 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.