The Roads Directorate is locked in a heated dispute with a South African joint venture after disqualifying its bid for the rehabilitation of the Maseru Private Siding railway track, a multi-million maloti project that has now spilled into potential litigation, Newsday has learnt.
MGT/BAHAI Joint Venture, comprising MGT Projects and Bahai Construction and Engineering – both South African-registered companies – has engaged lawyers and is preparing to sue the Roads Directorate.
Bahai Construction and Engineering boasts, on their website, of highly skilled personnel specialising in railway maintenance.
The joint venture claims it was unfairly disqualified after its bid had advanced through technical and financial evaluation stages.
The tender (RD/DD/5-A) for the “Plant and Design Build of the Rehabilitation of Maseru Private Siding Railway Track” was advertised in October 2025. It explicitly required bidders to submit a valid bid security in the form of an unconditional bank guarantee of LSL 100,000.
According to Lehlohonolo Seshophe Mabote, a Lesotho-born director of Bahai Construction and Engineering, the joint venture attended the non-compulsory site visit and pre-tender briefing on October 17, 2025. Its bid was submitted on the extended closing date of November 22, 2025.
The tender document had stated: “A non-compulsory site visit and pre-tender briefing, at the tender’s own cost, have been organised on 17 October 2025… Prospective bidders are requested to assemble at the Maseru Industrial Area at the Railway Level Crossing… by 9:30 am.”
Seshophe Mabote said: “The submission of tenders was initially scheduled for Thursday, November 13, 2025, but the client subsequently granted an extension. On the extended date of submission, being November 22, 2025, we received an email notification instructing us to attend the tender opening. I was present in person at the technical opening session. After the public opening, all bidders were invited to demonstrate inclusion of the required Bank Guarantee in their tender documentation. We complied fully, and our copy of the Bank Guarantee was available and met the requirements.”
At this stage, Seshophe Mabote said, several companies were procedurally disqualified for failing to provide the bank guarantee.
Subsequently, Seshophe Mabote said they received an invitation on January 30, 2026, “addressed to all companies that had successfully completed the technical stage,” he claimed, adding the invitation was for the financial bid opening.
“We duly attended the financial opening session. Our tender price was R8,673,913.05 exclusive of VAT, while the only remaining qualifying competitor submitted a price in excess of R40 million,” Seshophe Mabote said.
In a statement to Newsday last month, Roads Directorate said M10 million had been allocated for the rehabilitation of the railway project during the 2025/26 financial year.
It said a detailed railway assessment was carried out in April 2025 together with Lesotho Flour Mills (LFM) and a South African engineering company called Flint.
According to the Directorate, the findings formed the basis for tender documents issued later. However, the procurement process reportedly failed after no contractor qualified for the work.
“The works were advertised and bids received. However, there was no successful bidder,” the Directorate said.
It said the tender will now be re-advertised regionally because of limited local expertise.
Seshophe Mabote told Newsday this week that after several follow-up calls, they received an email on March 6, 2026, from Ntaba Manoeli of the Roads Directorate’s procurement department, “stating that our bid was unsuccessful on the grounds of non-compliance”.
This is the email that triggered contention between the MGT/Bahai Joint Venture and the Roads Directorate. Seshophe Mabote said, “We then appealed the decision but were rejected”.
Meanwhile, Newsday saw a letter of appeal that MGT/Bahai Joint Venture wrote to Road Directorate’s Procurement Manager, Manoeli, dated February 27, 2026 and entitled: “Formal Objection to Disqualification on the Grounds of Alleged Non-Submission of Bid Security”.
The letter continued: “We hereby lodge a formal objection to the decision to disqualify our bid on the basis that no bid security was submitted. The decision is fundamentally flawed and misguided because it is founded on a factually incorrect basis and is furthermore inconsistent with the procurement records.”
MGT/Bahai Joint Venture argued that their bid security was submitted and met requirements of the tender.
This newspaper also saw the bid security dated November 17, 2025. The document is endorsed by a certain Sekemo Risk Services and reads in part: “We (Sekemo) hereby confirm cover for MGT Projects (Pty) Ltd/Bahai JV upon award of the tender Contract Number RD/DD/5-A; Sum Insured: R100 000; Policy Number 163366789; Insurance Company: Guardrisk.”
The document is signed for by one Seletshoge Tsitsing – Executive Broker Commercial and Personal Insurance.
On February 26, 2026, Manoeli responded to the joint venture’s appeal, noting: “This letter serves as a formal communication on the tender for “the plant and design of the rehabilitation of Maseru private siding railway track” you had tendered for. As per IBT 19, subsection 19.3, which states that “Any bid not accompanied by an enforceable and substantially complaint bid security, if one is required in accordance with ITB 19.1, shall be rejected by the employer as non-responsive.”
Manoeli argued the MGT/Bahai Joint Venture did not comply with this requirement, “this is to be read with ITB 37, “the Employer reserves the right to accept or reject any bid, and to annul the bidding process and reject all bids at any time prior to contract award, without thereby incurring any liability to bidders. In a case of annulment, all bid submitted and specifically, bid securities, shall promptly be returned to the bidders.”
MGT/Bahai JV was non-responsive to this tender and therefore they were rejected, Manoeli firmly held.
But Manoeli’s response did not sit well with the Joint Venture’s management. On March 9, 2026, they wrote back to Manoeli again. Their letter was now entitled: “Formal Legal Response – Disqualification of MGT/Bahai Joint Venture Contract No. RD/DD/5-A.”
They appealed: “We refer to your letter dated February 26, 2026, communicating the decision of the Roads Directorate to declare the bid submitted by MGT/Bahai Joint Venture non-responsive on the grounds that the bid security provided was not in the form of an unconditional bank guarantee”.
They said after careful review of the reasons advanced by Manoeli, “we must respectfully but firmly reject the position adopted by the Roads Directorate”.
They counter-argued: “The decision to retrospectively disqualify our bid after the completion of the technical and financial evaluation stages is inconsistent with the governing procurement framework, violates well-established principles of administrative law, and undermines the integrity of the procurement process”, their letter read in part.
The MGT/Bahai JV’s position is that, “the doctrine of legitimate expectation arises where a public authority, through its conduct or representations, creates a reasonable expectation that a particular procedure will be followed. In the present case, the Roads Directorate conducted the evaluation process in a structured sequence in which; (a) our bid was accepted at the preliminary compliance stage, (b) our bid was subjected to full technical evaluation and scored, (c) our Joint Venture was formally recommended for the financial opening.”
By allowing their bid to progress through all these stages without objection regarding the bid security, the Joint Venture argues the Roads Directorate created a clear and reasonable expectation that their bid had satisfied the compliance requirements of the tender.
They argue the sudden reversal of this position after financial evaluation constitutes a breach of that legitimate expectation and undermines the predictability and fairness required in public procurement.
Seshophe Mabote told Newsday on Tuesday that their lawyers were this week preparing papers to a file a lawsuit against the Roads Directorate.
Summary
- The Roads Directorate is locked in a heated dispute with a South African joint venture after disqualifying its bid for the rehabilitation of the Maseru Private Siding railway track, a multi-million maloti project that has now spilled into potential litigation, Newsday has learnt.
- Seshophe Mabote said they received an invitation on January 30, 2026, “addressed to all companies that had successfully completed the technical stage,” he claimed, adding the invitation was for the financial bid opening.
- Seshophe Mabote told Newsday this week that after several follow-up calls, they received an email on March 6, 2026, from Ntaba Manoeli of the Roads Directorate’s procurement department, “stating that our bid was unsuccessful on the grounds of non-compliance”.
I am a journalist based in Maseru, Lesotho, renowned for investigative reporting. Over the years, my work has been published both locally and internationally, including in South Africa through the Amabhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism and the Daily Maverick, among other publications.
In Lesotho, I have served as a senior reporter for several leading weekly newspapers, including the Lesotho Times, Public Eye, and Sunday Express. My reporting has focused on uncovering issues of public interest, promoting accountability, and giving voice to underreported stories.
In 2016, I co-founded the MNN Centre for Investigative Journalism in Maseru, an initiative dedicated to strengthening investigative journalism and fostering a culture of transparency and public-interest reporting in Lesotho.
