Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
M. NAGAPRASANNA
CISB Services Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Represented By Its Secretary (Commerce And Industries) – Respondent
ORDER :
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.
The petitioner is before this Court seeking a direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to declare that the stipulation in the tender floated by the 3rd respondent in reserving 100% of the work to MSEs in the tenders floated by it, is violative of law and it is in ignorance of the bid submitted by the petitioner, who according to the petitioner, is the lowest bidder and is fully qualified to be awarded the contract.
2. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:
2.1. The petitioner is said to be a Company established in the year 2004 - a Private Limited Company. It is the case of the petitioner that it is a PAN - India entity and is engaged in providing services in the fields of security, housekeeping and outsourcing. In the year 2004-2005, the averment in the petition is, that the petitioner has been consistently from those said years, providing services to public sector banks and public sector undertakings. On 23-03-2012, the Government of India notifies a Public Procurement Policy for Micro and Small Enterprises (MSEs 2012) (hereinafter referred to as the ‘MSE Policy 2012’ for short) notified under the MSME Development Act, 2006. The said poli
Judicial review of tender conditions is limited; courts should not interfere unless actions are arbitrary, discriminatory, or mala fide, ensuring public interest is prioritized.
The formulation of tender conditions falls within the administrative domain of the authority, and judicial review is limited to preventing arbitrariness or favoritism. The courts cannot interfere wit....
Point of Law : Court would not sit in the arm chair of experts or the Tender Scrutiny Committee, which has scrutinized and found the 3rd respondent to be responsive and had to be awarded the contract....
The participation in a tender process waives the right to subsequently challenge its conditions unless proven arbitrary or illegal.
The court affirmed that stringent eligibility criteria in public tender processes cannot violate statutory relaxations for Start-ups, emphasizing limited grounds for judicial review.
Judicial review in public procurement is limited; courts refrain from interference unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or bad faith is established.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
