Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
V.KAMESWAR RAO, MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Vision Diagnostic India Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
All India Institute Of Medical Sciences – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks to quash the tender condition (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. creation of a new condition in the tender process (Para 6 , 10) |
| 3. presumption of innocence in fir context (Para 11 , 19) |
| 4. discretion of tender authority to cancel (Para 28 , 30) |
| 5. judicial review of tender conditions (Para 53 , 54 , 56) |
| 6. unreasonableness of qualification criteria (Para 70 , 78) |
JUDGMENT :
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.
CM APPL. 54020/2025 (for taking on record additional documents)
1. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. The additional documents are taken on record.
2. The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 13179/2025 and CM APPL. 64121/2025
3. This petition has been filed with the following prayers:
“a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, calling for records & to quash/set aside/strike off the impugned Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) bearing Tender Enquiry No. NCI- 47/DTM/2024-25 dated 25.07.2025 issued by Respondents Annexed as Annexure P – 2.
b) To quash the impugned Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) dated 25.07.2025 as it imposes the disqualification condition requiring that “the bidder should submit an undertaking that no FIR/cr
The court ruled that a tender condition disqualifying bidders based on pending FIRs is unconstitutional, violating Articles 14 and 19(1)(g), emphasizing the presumption of innocence and due process i....
Tender eligibility criteria can legally disqualify bidders based on pending criminal proceedings, reflecting public interest, even without prior conviction, affirming judicial restraint in administra....
The rejection of the petitioners' bid was justified based on their debarment for supplying substandard quality drugs, in line with the State's policy to keep such manufacturers out of the tender proc....
Judicial review in public procurement is limited; courts refrain from interference unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or bad faith is established.
The Court upheld the Corporation's authority to impose pre-qualification criteria and found that it did not amount to blacklisting the petitioner.
The court upheld the authority's discretion in evaluating tender bids, emphasizing the need for compliance with mandatory conditions and the absence of arbitrariness in disqualification decisions.
The decision to disqualify a bidder from a tender process does not require a reasoned order and should defer to the understanding and appreciation of the tender documents by the employer of the proje....
The court affirmed that a bidder's disqualification due to false declarations in tender processes is valid, emphasizing limited judicial review in contractual matters.
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
