Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BHARGAV D.KARIA, L.S.PIRZADA
Shailesh Patel S/O Ramashankar Patel – Appellant
Versus
Gujarat Informatics Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER :
BHARGAV D. KARIA, J.
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Rohin Bhatt, appearing on behalf of learned advocate Mr.Anand M. Ranpara for the petitioner.
2. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
“A. Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned RFP issued by the Respondent No. 1, and after going through the same, declare that the process, as laid down in the RFP document was not followed, and thus, declare the entire process as being ab initio null and void.
B. Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus calling for records pertaining to the impugned RFP, and after going through the same, quash the Tender Conditions in Clause 3.2 as being arbitrary and unreasonable;
C. Issue a writ, order, or direction, further directing that the Respondent No. 2 cancel the impugned RFP and invite bids afresh in line with prayers (a) and (b) herein;
D. Pending the hearing and disposal of the present Special Civil Application:
i. Direct Respondent No. 1 to abstain from awarding the tender, or moving forward with the tender process until the dispo
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....
Judicial review is permissible in tender matters only to prevent arbitrariness; criteria should ensure fairness and cannot favor specific bidders without rational basis.
The cancellation of a tender by an authority after the bidding process is complete is arbitrary unless supported by clear, substantiated justifications, reaffirming the need for transparency and fair....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limitation of judicial review in tender matters, the need for commercial prudence in evaluating tenders, and the importance of fairness and non....
The court affirmed that stringent eligibility criteria in public tender processes cannot violate statutory relaxations for Start-ups, emphasizing limited grounds for judicial review.
Eligibility criteria in tender processes must ensure fairness and cannot be deemed arbitrary without sufficient evidence to demonstrate biases or unreasonable standards.
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.
The court upheld the authority's discretion in setting eligibility criteria for tenders, emphasizing that judicial review is limited to cases of arbitrariness or unreasonableness.
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
