Point of Law : The author of the document is the best person to understand and appreciate its requirement, further observing that it is possible that the owner or employer of the project may give an interpretation to the tender documents that is not acceptable to the Constitutional Courts but that by itself is not a reason for interfering with the interpretation given.

JUDGMENT :

KALYAN RAI SURANA, J.

1. Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. K. Mohammed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Mozumdar, learned Addl. Advocate General, assisted by Mr. K. Goswami, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate for the State respondent nos. 1 to 3 and Mr. B.D. Deka, learned counsel for respondent no. 4.

2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed (a) to set aside and quash the NIT no. DSW(ICDS) G/96/2021/19 dated 09.08.2021; (b) to direct the state respondents to forthwith cancel/ recall/ rescind and/or otherwise forebear from giving effect to the said NIT; (c) to set aside and quash point no. 1(8) of Section 1A of the said NIT; (d) to direct the state respondents to forthwith cancel/ recall/ rescind and/or otherwise forebear from giving effect to point no. 1(8) of Section 1-A of the said NIT; (e) to set aside and quash the corrigendum no. DSW(ICDS) G/96/2021/49 dated 10.08.2021; (f) for issuing mandamus not to disqualify the petitioner in terms of point no. 1(8) of Section 1A of the said NIT; (g) for a writ, direction or order to the respondent authorities so as to provide adequate relief to the petitioner for the ends of justice.

3. The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and it is claimed that it is one of the foremost producers of PV dyed yarn, cotton and OE yarn and also ready to stitch fabric, having its own in-house facility for spinning, weaving and processing with capacity of more than 1,00,000 meter per day. It is also claimed that the petitioner had been supplying uniform cloth materials to the satisfaction of the respondent authorities without any complain.

4. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the past three financial years, the annual turnover of the petitioner was Rs.1,87,363 lakh in the year 2018-19, Rs.1,78,297 lakh in the year 2019-20, Rs.1,35,355 lakh in the year 2020-21 and therefore, the average annual turnover of the petitioner in the last three financial year was Rs.1,67,005 lakh. It was further submitted that for the purpose of supplying uniforms for Anganwadi workers and helpers for the year 2019-20, the respondent authorities had issued a NIT dated 11.07.2019. In the said tender, it was provided, amongst others, that if the bidder was the manufacturer, the manufacturer was exempted for submitting proof of past experience for supply of similar materials, in any government department and that the requisite experience was that supply should have been made previously for similar materials not relating to supply of sarees, chadar and mekhela only. It is submitted that in the present NIT dated 09.08.2021, as modified by a corrigendum dated 10.08.2021, there was a departure in Point no. 1(8) of Section 1-A relating to qualification criteria and it was prescribed that the bidder must enclose proof of past performance for supply of uniform saree/ chadar and mekhela only to any Govt. Department in any one year during past four years before the bid opening date along with the Government order copy for minimum of Rs.3.20 crore (approximately 40% of the tender value). Accordingly, it is submitted that the modified point no. 1(8) of Section 1-A of the NIT dated 09.08.2021 is to oust competition as there are only very limited textile manufacturer who would be able to fulfill the said tailormade eligibility criteria. It has further submitted that a textile manufacturer would normally manufacture and supply cloth, fabric, etc. and that from such fabric, saree, chadar and mekhela are produced as a finish product. Hence, it is submitted that the said point no. 1(8) of Section 1-A of the NIT is unreasonable and arbitrary. Moreover, it was submitted that the requirement of having past experience of supplying uniform saree, chadar and mekhela and has no nexus with the other eligibility criteria as well as the object sought to be achieved under the imp