SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(AP) 1054

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI
VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J.
The Krishna District Cooperative Marketing Society Ltd & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of A.P., Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Women 86 Child Welfare Department & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 30097 of 2023
Decided On : 04-04-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: N. Nanda Kishore.
For the Respondents: GP For Women Dev Child Welfare.

IMPORTANT POINT
Judicial review in tender matters is limited; rejection based on non-compliance with tender conditions is not arbitrary.

Headnote:

(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ petition challenging rejection of tender bid - Petitioner alleged arbitrary rejection without reasons - Court held that rejection was based on non-compliance with tender conditions, specifically Clause 2.2.1(f) & (i) regarding submission of audited documents - Judicial review in tender matters is limited and does not extend to merits of administrative decisions unless arbitrary or irrational. (Paras 29, 36, 37)

(B) Tender Process - The authority has discretion in evaluating bids and is not obliged to provide reasons for rejection unless specified in the tender conditions - The court does not interfere with tender processes unless there is a clear abuse of discretion or violation of principles of natural justice. (Paras 28, 36)

Facts of the case:

The petitioner, a food commodities supplier, challenged the rejection of its tender bid for supplying nutrition kits to Anganwadi Centers, claiming it met all technical criteria. The bid was rejected without stated reasons, leading to allegations of favoritism towards another bidder.

Findings of Court:

The court found that the petitioner was disqualified for failing to submit required audited financial documents, thus the rejection was not arbitrary or illegal.

Issues: The main issues were whether the rejection of the bid was arbitrary and whether the petitioner had a right to challenge the tender process despite being disqualified.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the rejection was justified based on non-compliance with tender requirements, emphasizing the limited scope of judicial review in tender matters.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

ORDER :

Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda, J.

1. Originally, this writ petition was filed by the petitioner against Respondent Nos.1 & 2. However, vide order of this Court in I.A.Nos.2, 4 & 5 of 2023 dated 27.11.2023, Respondent Nos.3 & 4 were impleaded as party respondents and vide order in I.A.No.5 of 2023 dated 27.11.2023, Petitioner No.2 was implead as proper and necessary party.

2. Though Petitioner No.2, was impleaded as proper and necessary party, no affidavit is filed on it’s behalf.

3. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming the following relief :

    i. declaring the action of the respondent No 2 in rejecting the bid of the petitioner vide IDNo680036 at the Technical stage without assigning any reasons through the petitioner fulfils the technical criteria mentioned in the tender published notification for Supply of YSR Sampoorna Poshana and YSR Sampoorna Poshana Plus products all together to all Anganwadi Centers in Unit II Of Kakinada East Godawari Konaseema West Godawari Eluru N T R And Krishna Districts 07 Districts under supplementary nutrition programme as illegal arbitrary unfair unreasonable and violation of Principles of Natural justice besides violation of Article 14 of Constitution of India

    ii. consequently to set-aside the rejection order dated 9.11. 2023 passed by the 2nd respondent rejecting the bid of the petitioner vide ID No 680036 at the Technical stage and declare that the petitioner is eligible to be considered equally along with other tenderers in a fair and transparent manner

4. The petitioner claims its position as a prominent manufacturer, wholesaler, and trader of food commodities, having successfully supplied food products to various Government institutions for many years. Specifically, it has catered to the needs of different welfare schemes, including the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS). Within the ICDS, the respondents have been tasked with providing supplementary nutrition to pregnant and lactating women to ensure safe childbirth. To achieve the said object, they used to distribute YSR Sampoorna Poshana (YSRSP) Kits and YSR Sampoorna Poshana Plus (YSRSPP) Kits at Anganwadi Centers, containing essential items such as Ragi Flour, Jaggery, Groundnut Chikki, Dry Dates, Rice Flakes, and Multigrain Atta. Tenders were invited by the respondents on a unit basis for the supply of these kits, covering with the entire State of Andhra Pradesh and divided into four Units, each unit comprising 6 to 7 districts.

5. In pursuance of the same, the 2nd respondent invited tenders for supply of YSRSP and YSRSP Plus Kits to all Anganwadi Centers in Unit II comprising of Kakinada, East Godavari, Konaseema, West Godavari, Eluru, N.T.R and Krishna Districts vide Tender ID No.680036 dated 03.11.2023. Being qualified, the petitioner submitted it’s bid strictly in accordance with the clauses of the tender notice. However, the 2nd respondent rejected without mentioning any ground.

6. During hearing, upon receipt of instructions from the commissioner, Women Development and Child Welfare Department, Guntur dated 19.11.2013, wherein it was informed that tender was finalized and allotted in favour of the successful bidder on 18.11.2023, this Court passed an interim direction on 20.11.2023 directing both the parties to maintain status quo as on date.

7. It is the contention of the petitioner that, the respondents rejected the bid of the petitioner without even mentioning any reason. It is alleged that, despite the petitioner meeting all the requisite conditions outlined in the tender notice, it appears that the respondents have rejected the bid with malicious intent, seemingly to favor a specific bidder for reasons unrelated to the tender's requirements. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed.

8. Respondent No.2 – Commissioner, Women and Child Welfare Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh filed counter affidavit along with vacate stay petition in I.A.No.7 of 2023, denyin

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top