MUMBAI: The Supreme Court on Monday expressed surprise that MMRDA considered Larsen & Toubro (L&T) technically non-responsive for the Thane tunnel and elevated road projects, despite the construction major having constructed iconic large public infrastructure projects. A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Bhushan Gavai asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for MMRDA, to take instructions on whether the public authority was willing to re-tender. The court did not pass any orders on Monday but asked MMRDA to re-think its next steps, else it would pass interim orders on Thursday, pending the bidding process, on L&T’s challenge.“The very name of the bidder (L&T)…” the CJI said, noting the firm was selected by the Centre to construct the Central Vista project when L&T’s challenge against a May 20 Bombay HC vacation bench order came up. The company’s counsel did not need to address the court. The SC bench, also comprising Justice A G Masih, posted the matter to Thursday while giving the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) time to consider what it asked of it. The SC asked MMRDA to consult the Maharashtra govt on plans to re-tender the Rs 14,000 crore project for the Thane-Ghodbunder-Bhayandar twin tunnel and elevated road project, together stretching around 15-16 km, making it the second longest such project after the 21 km Atal Setu (which L&T, as the largest engineering company, helped build).The HC vacation bench dismissed L&T’s pleas to stay the opening of financial or price bids for the project without informing it of the result of the technical bid round. The MMRDA said L&T and two other bidders out of five were held non-responsive, but it was not obliged under the tender terms to inform the bidders of the result during the bidding process and would do so once the final winning bidder was awarded the contract.L&T argued that PWD guidelines of the state required bidders to be informed of the technical rounds as well. MMRDA said it was not mandatory. The HC cited the public importance of the project, the delay that may ensue, and SC orders in the bullet train project, to not stay the opening of the price bids but asked MMRDA to keep all price bids sealed for two weeks to enable L&T to go in appeal. The HC said the company suppressed certain bid clauses when it came to court and stated the petitioner must come to court with full disclosure. Senior counsel Janak Dwarkadas for L&T before the HC also argued that CVC guidelines on transparency and accountability were being flouted by MMRDA.However, the HC found “much merit” in the submission of senior counsel AM Singhvi for L&T that the tender terms were contrary to the PWD and CVC guidelines. The HC observed the tender conditions to be prima facie “opaque and such that could give rise to the tendering authority acting in an arbitrary and non-transparent manner.” But it noted that L&T accepted the terms and participated without challenging them as they should have.L&T rushed to the SC against the HC order, and now the SC will pass orders on Thursday based on what MMRDA comes back with.