Sunday, June 07, 2026
info@thelawobserver.in
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Reportable

Can a Concessionaire Exercise Right of First Refusal Without Bidding? Supreme Court Says No

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA vs GWALIOR JHANSI EXPRESSWAY LIMITED

Listen to this judgment

4 min read

Key Takeaways

• A court cannot allow a concessionaire to exercise a right of first refusal without participating in the bidding process.
• Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not exempt a party from complying with tender conditions.
• The principle of fair competition in tender processes mandates participation from all interested bidders.
• An entity that fails to participate in a tender cannot claim rights based on prior agreements or orders.
• Judicial review of tender processes is limited to ensuring compliance with established legal principles and fairness.

Introduction

The Supreme Court of India recently addressed a significant issue regarding the right of first refusal (ROFR) in the context of a tender process. The case involved the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and Gwalior Jhansi Expressway Limited, where the court ruled that a concessionaire must participate in the bidding process to exercise its right to match the lowest bid. This ruling has important implications for the interpretation of tender processes and the rights of parties involved in such agreements.

Case Background

The dispute arose from a concession agreement between NHAI and Gwalior Jhansi Expressway Limited, which was tasked with widening a section of National Highway No. 75. The project faced delays, leading NHAI to issue a notice to cure breaches. Gwalior Jhansi Expressway Limited contested this action and sought interim relief from the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Tribunal granted the concessionaire the right to match the lowest bid in future tenders, which NHAI later contested.

What The Lower Authorities Held

The Arbitral Tribunal initially ruled in favor of Gwalior Jhansi Expressway Limited, allowing it to exercise its right of first refusal without requiring participation in the bidding process. This decision was upheld by the High Court of Delhi, which found no merit in NHAI's argument that participation was necessary.

The Court's Reasoning

The Supreme Court, however, disagreed with the lower authorities. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to the principles governing tender processes, which are designed to ensure transparency and fair competition. The court noted that the right of first refusal should only apply if the concessionaire participated in the bidding process, as stipulated in the tender documents.

The court highlighted that the tender process is not merely a formality but a critical mechanism to ensure that all interested parties have an equal opportunity to compete. By failing to participate, Gwalior Jhansi Expressway Limited forfeited its right to claim any benefits under the tender process. The court also pointed out that the absence of an express exemption from participating in the bidding process meant that the concessionaire could not claim the right of first refusal.

Statutory Interpretation

The court's ruling involved a detailed interpretation of Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. While this section allows for interim measures, the court clarified that it does not grant parties the right to bypass established tender conditions. The court underscored that compliance with the tender process is essential for maintaining the integrity of public contracts and ensuring that the best value is obtained for public resources.

CONSTITUTIONAL OR POLICY CONTEXT

The ruling also reflects broader principles of public policy and the need for fairness in public procurement processes. The court's insistence on participation in the bidding process aligns with the constitutional mandate for transparency and accountability in government contracts. This decision reinforces the notion that public entities must act in the public interest and adhere to fair competition standards.

Why This Judgment Matters

This judgment is significant for several reasons. Firstly, it clarifies the legal standing of rights arising from tender processes, particularly the right of first refusal. It establishes that such rights cannot be claimed without active participation in the bidding process, thereby promoting fairness and competition.

Secondly, the ruling serves as a reminder to all parties involved in public contracts to adhere strictly to the terms and conditions outlined in tender documents. It reinforces the principle that non-compliance can lead to the forfeiture of rights and claims.

Finally, this decision may influence future cases involving tender processes and the rights of concessionaires, setting a precedent for how courts interpret participation requirements and the enforcement of tender conditions.

Final Outcome

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by NHAI, quashing the orders of the Arbitral Tribunal and the High Court. The court ruled that Gwalior Jhansi Expressway Limited could not exercise its right of first refusal without participating in the bidding process, thereby dismissing its application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

Case Details

  • Case Title: NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA vs GWALIOR JHANSI EXPRESSWAY LIMITED
  • Citation: 2018 INSC 609
  • Court: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
  • Bench: Justice Dipak Misra, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud
  • Date of Judgment: 2018-07-13

Official Documents

More Judicial Insights

View all insights →
When Does Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC Apply? Supreme Court Clarifies

When Does Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC Apply? Supreme Court Clarifies

Ram Manohar Singh vs The State of Uttar Pradesh

Read Full Analysis
Can Cognizance Be Taken by Magistrate Under Atrocities Act? Supreme Court Clarifies

Can Cognizance Be Taken by Magistrate Under Atrocities Act? Supreme Court Clarifies

Shantaben Bhurabhai Bhuriya vs Anand Athabhai Chaudhari & Ors.

Read Full Analysis
Murder Acquittal in High-Profile Case: Supreme Court Upholds High Court's Decision