NHIDCL lists ₹12,176 crore as project cost for 166.80 km high-speed corridor tender
NHIDCL is inviting consultants to provide Independent Engineer services for the development, maintenance, management, and operation of a 166.80 km Greenfield High-Speed Corridor (NH-6) in Meghalaya and Assam.
The document states that the RFP is invited from 'eligible Consultants' but does not specify the minimum turnover, years of experience, required certifications, or entity type in the provided text. It notes that selection will be on a QCBS basis with 80:20 weightage for Technical and Financial scores.
- Tender Type: International Competitive Bidding
- Bid Validity: 120 days from Bid Due Date
- Assignment Period: 54 months (6 months development, 36 months construction, 12 months O&M)
- Tender Fee: Rs. 5,900/- (non-refundable)
- Bid Opening Date: 17-02-2026
Written from the document by AI, and checked against it. The original below is authoritative.
The original document
Notice
2026-01-03
Notice
2026-01-03
Notice
2026-01-03
Corrigendum 1
2026-01-03
scanned
Tap “Open the PDF” above to view this document.
Corrigendum 2
2026-01-03
Tap “Open the PDF” above to view this document.
Corrigendum 3
2026-01-03
scanned
Tap “Open the PDF” above to view this document.
Corrigendum 4
2026-01-03
scanned
Tap “Open the PDF” above to view this document.
Document details
| Official title | Independent Engineer Services for “Development, maintenance, management and operation of Greenfield High-Speed Corridor of 166.80 km (NH-6) from Mawlyngkhung (near Shillong) in Meghalaya to Panchgram (near Silchar) in Assam on Hybrid Annuity Mode” |
| Source body | National Highways & Infrastructure Development Corporation (NHIDCL) |
| Reference number | — |
| Status | closed (archive) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Closing date | 16-02-2026 |
| Documents | 8 · changed 4× after publishing |
Observations & questions a citizen might ask
Factual observations drawn mechanically from the documents — not findings or allegations. Verify each against the original.
- The department changed this document 4 times after first publishing it.
- What prompted each amendment, and was the closing date extended to give bidders time to respond?
- Do the eligibility and scope requirements match the stated purpose and estimated value?
- Were all amendments published on the portal before the deadline?