The eligibility of a partnership firm in tender processes can be established through the financial credentials of its individual partners, affirming courts' limited interference in administrative decisions.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep V. Marne, J.

1. The Petitioner has filed the present petition invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking declaration of ineligibility of Respondent No.6 in the tender process initiated by Respondent Nos.1 to 5 for allotment of warehouses on lease for a period of 30 years. Petitioner has also sought writ of mandamus for consideration of its bid for allotment of seven warehouses which have been allotted to Respondent No.6.

2. Brief facts leading to filing of the present petition are as under :-

Respondent Nos.1 to 5 floated tender vide Notice dated 24 July 2024 for grant of lease in respect of 16 warehouses and one Central Store Office for a tenure of thirty years. The tender notice stipulated eligibility criteria, inter-alia pertaining to turnover and net worth of the bidders. The tender notice required the bidders to have annual financial turnover exceeding Rs. 50,00,000/- and in the event of the bidder bidding for more than one warehouse, the bidder was required to satisfy eligibility of annual financial turnover exceeding Rs.50,00,000/- for each warehouse. Similarly, the tender notice prescribed eligibility criteria of bidder’s net worth exceeding Rs. 50,00,000/- for each of the warehouses. Petitioner submitted his bids in respect of the eight warehouses and one Central Store Office on 9 August 2024. Similarly, nine other bidders submitted their bids in pursuance of the tender notice, which included Respondent No.6. After conducting technical evaluation, seven bidders were adjudged technically eligible by the tendering authority, including Petitioner and Respondent No.6. The financial bids were opened on 16 August 2024 and thereafter allotment in respect of 16 warehouses and one Central Store Office was finalised by Respondent Nos.1 to 5, under which total 10 warehouses are allotted to Respondent No.6. Warehouse No.16 and the Central Store Office are allotted to the Petitioner. Petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of Respondent Nos.1 to 5 in allotting 7 out of the 10 warehouses (for which Petitioner had bid) in favour of Respondent No.6 on the ground that Respondent No.6 is erroneously held eligible in the tender process. Petitioner has accordingly filed the present petition seeking disqualification of Respondent No.6 in the impugned tender process and for consideration of his bid for allotment of the said 7 warehouses.

3. We have heard Mr. Naphade, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. He would submit that Respondent Nos.1 to 5 have erroneously held Respondent No.6 eligible though it had not fulfilled the mandatory eligibility criteria relating to turnover and net worth. That Respondent No.6 is a partnership firm, which was set up only on 2 July 2024 i.e. merely 20 days prior to issuance of tender on 22 July 2024. That therefore it was impossible for Respondent No.6 to satisfy the requirement of annual financial turnover exceeding Rs.50,00,000/- each year and for previous three years. He would further submit that partners of Respondent No.6 also did not submit requisite certificate of Chartered Accountant to indicate that they possessed annual financial turnover exceeding Rs.50,00,000/-. That therefore Respondent Nos.1 to 5 ought to have rejected the technical bid of Respondent No.6 for failure to submit certificate of Chartered Accountant to demonstrate annual financial turnover as required in the E-Tender Notice. Mr. Naphade would further submit that for satisfying the mandatory condition of networth of Rs.50,00,000/- per warehouse, Respondent No.6 submitted Networth Certificate dated 27 Apr