Rubee K from PWD shares views on L1 Bidding System

Adopting QCBS with minimum technical thresholds has proven effective in ensuring durable outcomes, even if the initial costs are higher.

Rubee K
Superintendent Engineer
Manipur PWD

Pitfalls of the L1 Tendering Approach

Although introduced for cost-effectiveness, the L1 system of tendering often overlooks vital aspects such as quality and timely project completion. Predatory bidding, where contractors quote abnormally low prices to secure projects and then attempt to recover losses during execution, has become common in public infrastructure. This results in compromised quality, with contractors deploying minimal resources and unskilled labour to cut costs. In National Highway projects, bids have gone as low as 47% below estimates, leading to frequent litigation as contractors exploit legal loopholes to avoid execution. Such practices not only compromise quality but also cause significant delays, undermining the purpose of timely infrastructure delivery.

Moving Towards Quality and Value-Based Procurement

To address these challenges, reforms must focus on rewarding quality and penalizing poor performance. A system that incentivizes superior execution while discouraging delays can help restore balance. Adopting QCBS with minimum technical thresholds has proven effective in ensuring durable outcomes, even if the initial costs are higher.

Strengthening institutional safeguards is equally important. Procurement policies must evolve from mere cost-cutting to value-building, with a focus on quality, fitness for purpose, and long-term sustainability. Building lasting infrastructure demands discretion and vision, not just the lure of the lowest price.