JUDGMENT

Manmohan, A.C.J. (Oral)

CM APPLs. 10865-66/2024 (for exemption)

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Accordingly, the present applications stand disposed of.

W.P.(C) 2634/2024 & CM APPL. 10864/2024

1. Present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to remove or modify the eligibility Clause nos. 4 and 6 as the tender evaluation criteria in the notice inviting tender (`impugned NIT') bearing No. IITD/ESTATE/(SP-4418)/2024, dated 23rd January, 2024.

2. The Respondent Institute has issued the said impugned NIT for the establishment, operation, maintenance, and comprehensive management of a commercial establishment (Eating Outlet) at Ground Floor of Synergy Building at IIT Delhi.

2.1. The tender document provides for `Initial Eligibility Criteria', under which the bidder should have an annual average turnover of Rs. 12 Crores per annum for the last three financial years, as stipulated under Clause No. 4, and the bidder should enclose a financial solvency certificate issued by a banker for an amount not less than Rs. one Crore, as stipulated under Clause No. 6.

2.2. Aggrieved by the introduction of the aforementioned Clause Nos. 4 and 6 of the Initial Eligibility Criteria for participation in the impugned NIT, the Petitioner has filed the present petition.

3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioner states that the Respondent Institute vide notice inviting tender bearing no. IITD/ISTA(SP- 1691)/2018 (`earlier NIT'), dated 1st June, 2018 had invited tenders for running the staff canteen at IIT Delhi. He states that the eligibility criteria for participating in the earlier NIT was that the bidder should have minimum financial turnover of Rs. 25 Lakhs per annum each during the last three consecutive years and the bidder should produce a solvency certificate from scheduled bank for an amount not less than Rs. 25 lakhs.

3.1. He states that the Respondent Institute has introduced a new eligibility criterion for running the same canteen in the premises of IIT Delhi, thereby increasing the requirement of annual average turnover to be Rs. 12 Crores. He states that the substantial increase in requirement of `annual average turnover' from Rs. 25 Lakhs to Rs. 12 Crores is arbitrary, irrational, whimsical, and vitiated by bias. He states that to his knowledge, the annual turn-over of the canteen is approximately Rs. 2 crores. He states that in view of this, the criteria of Rs. 12 crores is irrational. He states that the substantial change in the financial eligibility criteria of the impugned NIT has been introduced with a malafide intention to allot the said tender to a specific party and oust the parties like Petitioner from participating in the tender bidding process. In support of his arguments, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner has relied upon the judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Dhingra Construction Co. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Others, 2005(79) DRJ 383 (DB) (Para 27) to contend that the pre-qualification criteria should not be made stringent so as to arbitrarily restrict the entry of bidders.

4. In reply, learned counsel for the Respondent Institute states that there cannot be any interference by this Court in the present matter, as it pertains to tender issuance process. He states that the Court must refrain from interfering with tender conditions unless the Petitioner can satisfy the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Tata Cellular v. Union of India, (1994) 6 SCC 651.

4.1. He states that the facts, which weighed with the Respondents while settling the pre-qualification criteria, were based on the feedback received from the teaching staff, non-teaching staff and the students who are the only users of the canteen. He states that no member of the general pubic has access to this canteen and, therefore, the tender conditions have been set down to meet the requirement of the users. He states that the size of the canteen is ap