Rejection of a technical bid based on non-submission of an IT Return not due at the time of bid submission constitutes arbitrary action, violating principles of fair evaluation.

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

Heard Mr. LN Dihingia, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in both the writ petitions. I have also heard Mr. A Sharma, the learned Standing Counsel, who appears on behalf of the Assam Plains Tribes Development Corporation Ltd. (for short, ‘the Corporation’) and Mr. D Gogoi, the learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondent No.4 in both the writ petitions and Mr. K Gogoi, the learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondent No.6 in WP(C)No.7076/2025.

2. The writ petitioner in WP(C)No.6542/2025 is aggrieved by the rejection of his technical bid, and the petitioner thereupon filed WP(C)No.7076/2025 challenging the work order dated 14.10.2025.

3. Before proceeding, this Court finds it very pertinent to observe that a re-tender in question was floated by the Corporation through an online mode. However, it is an admitted fact that till the filing of both the writ petitions, the work order dated 14.10.2025, which was issued in favour of the respondent No.4 was not uploaded in the e-portal.

FACTUAL MATRIX:

4. In the backdrop of the above, let this Court now deal with the material facts which are relevant for the adjudication of the present proceedings.

The Corporation, through its Managing Director issued a Notice Inviting Re-Tender, inviting bids from the registered eligible contractors/firms registered under the Corporation for Upgradation and Renovation of the Building of Hostel No.03 of Nowgong Polytechnic, Nagaon under SOPD-ODS during the year 2023-24.

5. Note-1 of the detailed Notice Inviting Re-Tender (for short, ‘the NIT’) stipulates that the contractors/bidders must be registered with the E-tendering system provider for participating in the bidding process.

6. Note-2 stipulates that online submission of the technical & financial bid is mandatory and manual submission without online submission of the bid would be considered as non responsive.

7. The last date for submission of the bid was on 28.07.2025 and the date of opening of the technical bid was on 28.07.2025.

8. The petitioner along with various other bidders participated pursuant to the said NIT dated 23.05.2025. Amongst the four bidders, whose technical bids were considered, bids of two of the bidders including the petitioner were rejected, whereas the technical bids of respondent No.4 and another were found to be compliant.

9. The reasons for rejection of the bids of two of the bidders were noted in the comparative statement (technical bid). In the case of the petitioner, the reason was “IT Return and turnover not submitted for the last financial year 2024-25” and in the case of another bidder, whose technical bid was also rejected i.e. one Sri Lakhyajeet Chetia for the reason “IT Return not submitted for the last financial year 2024-25”.

10. The petitioner being aggrieved by the rejection of the technical bid on the ground stated in the comparative statement had approached this Court.

11. It is the case of the petitioner that for the purpose of filing the Returns for the financial year 2024-25, the last date for submission was on 31.10.2025 as per the Circular issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of India, Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 25.09.2025. It is the further case of the petitioner that the last date for submission of the IT Return was extended to 10.12.2025 as would be seen from the Circular issued on 29.10.2025. The case of the petitioner, therefore, is that on the ground of non submission of the IT Return and turnover for the last financial year 2024-25, the petitioner's bid could not have been rejected, more particularly, when t