Was there any irregularity in giving the tender for Dharavi project to Adani? Know the SC decision
#News India Bureau, March 08,2025
The Supreme Court has issued a notice to Adani Properties in the Dharavi slum redevelopment project case. The Supreme Court was hearing a petition challenging the award of the Dharavi project tender to Adani Properties. Sec Link Technologies had filed this petition. This case is against the decision of the Bombay High Court, in which the decision of the Maharashtra government was upheld. The Maharashtra government had earlier cancelled the tender given to Sec Link and re-issued it to Adani Properties Private Limited.
Anyway, a bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar heard the case. In its petition, Sec Link has raised two main issues. First, the cancellation of the first tender and second, the conditions of the new tender.
Sec Link was given the first tender, but it was cancelled due to changes in the contract. The new tender included 45 acres of railway land, which Sec Link challenged. Sec Link alleges that the second tender was specifically prepared in favour of certain bidders, thereby excluding it.
Issuing the notice, the court said that Sec Link is ready to offer Rs 8,640 crore, which is much higher than the current highest bid. The current bid has been placed by Adani which is Rs 5069 crore. Issuing the notice on this, the court said, ‘It is clear that this amount is excluding other obligations, in which the highest bidder has agreed to pay Rs 1000 crore for lease and Rs 2,800 crore as minimum compensation amount. The petitioner will file an affidavit in this regard.’ The next hearing on the notice may take place on May 25.
The court also directed that all payments will be made through an escrow account. The Chief Justice said that since the matter is sub judice, Adani will make payments from only one bank account and the disbursement will be made for the project work, reports Live Law. He also directed that invoices and billing be maintained properly.
The Supreme Court also clarified that since some demolition work has already started, neither of the two parties will be able to claim any exclusive rights.
Senior advocate Aryama Sundaram, appearing for Sec Link, argued that his company is ready to increase the current bid (Rs 7,200 crore) by 20%. He also said that this increased amount will be given along with the terms of the new tender. On the other hand, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Adani, said that the petitioner is now barred from raising the second issue. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Maharashtra government, said that the development plan has already started under the new tender and railway quarters have also been demolished.
Let us tell you that on December 20, 2024, the Bombay High Court upheld the tender given to Adani Properties. A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Amit Borkar had said that cancelling the first tender and issuing a new tender was not arbitrary or irrational.
The Maharashtra government had issued the first tender in 2018. In this, Sec Link had made the highest bid of Rs 7,200 crore, while Adani’s bid was Rs 4,529 crore. However, in 2020 the government canceled the tender to include railway land and issued a second tender with new conditions in 2022. In this, Adani was declared the winner with a bid of Rs 5,069 crore.
The case is not just about corporate competition, but also involves questions of public interest and transparency. Sec Link claims that the new tender was discriminatory, while the government and the High Court consider it to be in the public interest because of the railway land involved. The Supreme Court’s move could further deepen the dispute, as Sec Link’s new offer is much higher than the existing bid. However, it remains to be seen whether the court will also consider the validity of the terms and process of the new tender.
The Dharavi redevelopment project is of great significance for Mumbai and it could have ramifications not only economically, but also socially and politically. The final verdict of the Supreme Court will determine whether transparency and fairness were maintained, or whether it was actually an attempt to benefit a particular party.
