Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, C.J, TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
Digitech Call System Pvt. Ltd – Appellant
Versus
India Post Payments Bank Ltd – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.
1. Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, inter alia, seeking the following reliefs:-
“a) Issue a writ, order, direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing and setting aside the following clauses of the RFP dated 04.09.2025 floated by the Respondent No. 1, through the GeM portal by way of Bid Document bearing Bid No. GEM/2025/B/6646167, for the selection of Service Provider for Contact Centre/Call Centre Operations:-
i. Sl. No. 1 of Section B of the Table at Annexure 3 of Clause 3.2 of the RFP which provides that the bidder should have a minimum average turnover of Rs. 50 Crores during the last three FYs, insofar as the same applies to Start-ups and MSEs;
ii. Sl No. 1 of Section C of the Table at Annexure 3 of Clause 3.2 of the RFP which provides that the bidder should be operating with an aggregate of at least 3000 agents for its Contact Centre Voice Operations based in India catering to domestic clients during the last FY, insofar as it applies to Start-ups and MSEs;
iii. Sl. No. 2 of Section C of the Table at Annexure 3 of Clause 3.2 of the RFP which provides that the bidder should have provided the inb
The court upheld that stringent eligibility criteria in public procurement for critical operations are lawful and necessary, allowing no exemptions for MSMEs when justified by the operational context....
Court emphasized the limits of judicial intervention in tender processes, maintaining that eligibility criteria must be rational and not arbitrary. The absence of merit in the petition led to its dis....
The authority of the tendering body to determine the terms and conditions of the tender, the limited scope of judicial review in tender matters, and the principle of judicial restraint in administrat....
(1) Mandatory procurement by Government – There is no mandatory minimum procurement ‘right’ of an individual MSE.(2) Judicial Review – Power of judicial review in matters concerning implementation of....
Judicial review is permissible in tender matters only to prevent arbitrariness; criteria should ensure fairness and cannot favor specific bidders without rational basis.
The court affirmed that stringent eligibility criteria in public tender processes cannot violate statutory relaxations for Start-ups, emphasizing limited grounds for judicial review.
In procurement matters, minimum eligibility criteria set by State authorities must be reasonable and not arbitrary; courts should exercise restraint in judicial review of such criteria.
The court established that significant deviations from tender guidelines and arbitrary evaluation criteria violate the principles of fairness and proportionality under Article 14 of the Constitution.
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
