Judicial review in tender matters emphasizes restraint unless actions are proven arbitrary or discriminatory; author of the tender is best placed to determine its requirements.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep V. Marne, J.

1) These two Petitions are filed challenging the tender process initiated by Respondent-Municipal Corporation for collection and transportation of Municipal Solid Waste in its Wards. Petitioners have challenged the tender conditions, particularly Corrigendum-III dated 1 July 2025 and have sought direction for issuance of fresh tender notice by prescribing the eligibility criteria as stipulated in the earlier tender floated for the years 2018-2025.

2) Brief facts of the case, leading to filing of the Petitions are that :-

Petitioners are engaged in the business of collection and transportation of solid waste. Petitioner in Writ Petition (L) No.21228 of 2025 is a proprietary firm engaged in the business of collection and transportation of solid waste and is undertaking various projects with the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM), last project being in the years 2018-2025. Petitioner in Writ Petition (L) No.21353 of 2025 is a Joint Venture of M/s. Enamdar Transport Co., M/s. Siddiqui Transport Co. and M/s. Silky Enterprises. The JV claims to have undertaken and completed the work of solid waste disposal for MCGM during the year 2007-2012 and 2012-2017 and are also currently carrying out work for the years 2018-2025.

3) MCGM floated a tender notice on 14 May 2025 for awarding the work of collection and transportation of municipal solid waste in its wards to transfer stations and final disposal sites for a period of seven years from 2025 to 2032. A pre-bid meeting was held on 29 May 2025. Both the Petitioners made representations complaining about stipulation of eligibility conditions in the tender notice. MCGM issued Corrigendum No.I on 10 June 2025 extending bid submission date to 26 June 2025 and bid-opening date to 1 July 2025. Thereafter Corrigendum No.II dated 25 June 2025 was issued extending bid submission date to 8 July 2025 and bid opening on 11 July 2025. Thereafter Corrigendum No.III was issued on 1 July 2025 by which some of the tender conditions were modified. According to the Petitioners Corrigendum No.III amounts to wholesome modification of the tender conditions. Petitioners have accordingly filed the present petition challenging the original tender document as well as Corrigendum-III dated 1 July 2025.

4) By order dated 16 July 2025, Petitioners were granted liberty to submit their bids without prejudice to the contentions raised in the petitions. Accordingly, Petitioners have submitted their bids in pursuance of the impugned tender process.

5) Dr. Tulzapurkar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioner in Writ Petition (L) No. 21228 of 2025 would submit that the tender conditions have been arbitrarily stipulated with a view to eliminate fair competition. That Corrigendum-III issued on 1 July 2025 completely alters the original tender conditions and such alteration is done for the purpose of disqualifying most of the bidders. That the newly introduced terms in the Corrigendum have no rational nexus with the object of the tender. That the Corrigendum is issued in utter abuse of power. That past experience of “door to door collection” has been added for restricting the competition. That experience of door-to- door collection, storage, segregation, transportation and disposal of municipal solid waste for 7 years is impossible of being fulfilled by any contractor from Mumbai as similar tender of the requisite magnitude has never been floated during past seven years in Mumbai City. That the SLF Waste processin