Supreme Court Flags Concerns in L&T's Plea Against MMRDA's ₹14,000 Crore Road Project Bids.

The Supreme Court recently expressed significant concern over a plea filed by engineering giant Larsen & Toubro (L&T), challenging the Bombay High Court's refusal to halt the opening of bids by the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) for two major road construction projects in Maharashtra, collectively valued at ₹14,000 crore.

L&T has alleged serious irregularities in the bidding process, claiming that it was uniquely left uninformed about the status of its bid, unlike other participating companies.

During the hearing, a bench comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih instructed the counsels representing MMRDA to seek immediate clarification from the authority regarding its stance on the matter. The bench underscored the substantial public money involved in the projects.

"This is thousands of crores of public money. Please take instructions, else we will stay this order," CJI Gavai sternly told Solicitor General Mehta.

The top court has scheduled the next hearing for Thursday.

Earlier, on May 23, a Supreme Court bench led by Justice J.B. Pardiwala had noted the extreme urgency of the matter before referring it to the CJI's bench for Monday's hearing.

The controversy stems from MMRDA's notification on July 27, 2024, inviting bids for a major public infrastructure project: an underground road tunnel from Gaimukh to Fountain Hotel Junction on Thane Ghodbunder Road. This project involves the construction of 5 km long twin tunnels, estimated at ₹8,000 crore, and is part of a larger 15 km road expansion from Gaimukh to Bhayander, intended to extend the Mumbai Coastal Road project.

L&T, a bidder for this project, submitted its technical bid on December 13, 2024, which was opened on January 1, 2025. The company asserts that it has received no updates on the evaluation of its bid since then.

Crucially, L&T claims it was neither informed that its technical bid was deemed non-responsive nor was it invited to the financial bid opening, a courtesy extended to other bidders. L&T argues that this conduct is unfair, discriminatory, and violates the principles of natural justice, contending that MMRDA, as a public authority, is obligated to act transparently and inform all bidders of technical evaluation outcomes before proceeding. Consequently, L&T had sought a stay on the opening of the financial bids.

However, the Bombay High Court had previously dismissed L&T's plea, emphasizing that the project is a mega-infrastructure initiative of significant public importance and that any delay would adversely impact its execution. The High Court also clarified that L&T retained the right to challenge the rejection of its technical bid and the eventual award of the contract.

L&T subsequently moved the Supreme Court to challenge the Bombay High Court's decision to dismiss its plea for a stay on bid opening. The Supreme Court's decision to re-examine the matter on Thursday indicates its serious consideration of the irregularities alleged by L&T.