The discretion of public authorities in contract renewals must align with contractual terms and not amount to arbitrary action, ensuring transparency and fairness in public procurement.

JUDGMENT :

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.

1. The petitioners in all four petitions are authorised parking contractors with the respondent/Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD). The issues that arise in these petitions are with respect to a Tender dated 15.01.2026 floated by the respondent MCD bearing No. AC/RPC/MCD/2026/D-1419, whereby e-bids have been invited for allotment of authorised surface parking sites under the jurisdiction of MCD on a Monthly License Fee (MLF) basis.

2. It is the case of the petitioners that they have been allotted various parking sites through earlier Tender dated 27.09.2022 bearing No. AC/RPC/MCD/D-907, which have now been placed in the new Tender bearing No. AC/RPC/MCD/2026/D-1419 dated 15.01.2026, despite the fact that the terms of the earlier Tender are subsisting. They also contend that the respondent failed to consider the contractual provision for extending the terms of the earlier tender.

3. Since the captioned petitions agitate the same issue and challenge the same tender dated 15.01.2026, we shall deal with them together. At the outset, we may narrate a brief factual background of the controversy, as seen from the petitions.

4. The respondent/MCD vide Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) bearing No. AC/RPC/MCD/D-907 floated a tender for allotment of various authorised parking sites on MLF basis. In terms thereof, the tenure for which the parking sites were being offered for allotment was three years, further extendable for another two years subject to satisfactory performance and as decided by the Competent Authority, from the date of signing of the Agreement/handing over the possession of the parking site to the contractor (whichever was earlier). According to the petitioner, to cut out any ambiguity in relation to granting extensions, what constituted as satisfactory performance was also defined in the said NIT by the respondent.

5. The petitioners, relying upon the express representation contained in the NIT regarding the 3+2 year tenure, submitted their respective bids, which were accepted by the respondents, and office letters were issued allotting different parking sites to the petitioners. The details of the allotment to each of the petitioners are as follows:

6. The offer letters reiterated that the allotment of the parking sites were for an initial period of three years, extendable by a further period of two years subject to satisfactory performance and the decision of the Competent Authority.

7. As the initial three year periods neared their completion, the petitioners submitted requests for extension of further two years, in accordance with Clauses 8 and 10 of the NIT No. 907 dated 27.09.2022. Through the requests, they asserted that throughout the tenures, they have ensured smooth and efficient management of the parking sites, with no dues pending and all operations conducted strictly in accordance with MCD guidelines. The petitioners further stated that bidders participate in MCD e- tenders and plan their investments on the basis of the declared "3+2 years" tenure framework, and that as on date there had been no change in the approved parking areas or parking rates which would warrant deviation from the said framework.

8. The petitioners, relying upon the express terms of the NIT and the consistent past practice of MCD in granting extensions on satisfactory performance, requested grant of the two-year extension in the interest of operational continuity, fairness and efficient site management. The said representations were duly