SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Gau) 539

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
M/s Jinku Enterprise, Rep. by its Proprietor, Mohiuddin Ahmed, S/o. Late Amiruddin Ahmed – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Assam, Rep. by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam – Respondent
Writ Petition (C) no. 1310 of 2024
Decided On : 10-02-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. B. Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. R. Dhar, Standing Counsel, Handloom and Textile Department, Government of Assam.

MSEs with valid Udyam Registration are exempt from turnover and experience criteria in bidding processes as per applicable regulations, and arbitrary disqualification on these grounds is unlawful.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ Petition - Technical bid disqualification - The petitioner challenged the Technical Evaluation Committee's decision disqualifying his bid based on non-conformity with Clause 13[p] of the Bidding Document - The bid was disqualified despite the petitioner holding an Udyam Registration Certificate exempting him from turnover and experience criteria under Clause 3[e] - Court found the disqualification arbitrary as it contravened established regulations for MSEs. (Paras 10, 16, 17)

(B) Bidding Process - Legal provisions governing the criteria for bidders - An MSE is exempt from prior turnover and experience requirements in public procurement when holding a valid Udyam Registration Certificate, which must be acknowledged without regard to arbitrary restrictions imposed by evaluation criteria. (Paras 17, 22)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a Micro Enterprise with a valid Udyam Registration Certificate, was disqualified from bidding for handloom supplies due to non-conformity with stated financial criteria in the Bidding Document, despite being exempt under applicable regulations.

Findings of Court:
The court quashed the Technical Evaluation Committee’s decision to disqualify the petitioner’s technical bid, finding such action to be arbitrary and unjustified under established rules for Micro and Small Enterprises.

Issues: Whether the disqualification based on Clauses 3[b] and 3[c] was appropriate for an MSE with a valid Udyam Registration Certificate under Clause 3[e]?

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that under Clause 3[e], MSEs are exempted from turnover and experience criteria, necessitating recognition of valid Udyam Registration Certificates when evaluating technical bids. Disqualifying a bid based on criteria that do not apply is arbitrary.

Result: Writ petition allowed, disqualification quashed.

Table of Content
1. introduction and background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. arguments on technical bid disqualification (Para 7 , 10 , 11)
3. analysis of eligibility criteria clauses (Para 12 , 16)
4. arbitrariness in disqualification decision (Para 17)
5. conclusion and directives to evaluate financial bid (Para 21 , 22)

JUDGMENT :

MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.

This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is preferred by the petitioner assailing a decision taken by the Technical Evaluation Committee on 22.02.2024 in connection with a bidding process initiated by an e-Tender Notice dated 11.01.2024 in so far as the Technical Bid of the petitioner is concerned. The Technical Evaluation Committee by its decision dated 22.02.2024 had inter alia disqualified the petitioner on the ground that the technical bid submitted by the petitioner was not conformity with Clause 13[p] of the Bidding Document.

2. By an e-Tender Notice published by the respondent no. 2, bids were invited in two-bids [Technical Bid and Financial Bid] system through e-Procurement system for ‘Empanelment of Manufacturers/Suppliers for supply of Handloom & Handloom Accessories to the beneficiaries under various schemes of Government of India and Government of Assam’, implemented by the Directorate of Handloom & Textiles, Assam. In the Bidding Document, the last date of submission of bids was mentioned and the manufacturers/suppliers were directed to submit their technical and financial bids on-line as per the time schedule.

3. The petitioner has claimed that he is in the business of production and supply of handloom & handloom accessories and he has experience of supplying those products to various Government agencies and has gathered experience in the said field. The petitioner has further stated that it has been registered as a ‘Micro Enterprise’ with the Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises [MSME], Government of India and it has an Udyam Registration Certificate issued to that effect with validity as on the date of the e-Tender Notice as well as on the last date of submission of bids. The Udyam Registration Certificate issued to the petitioner has listed the products which the petitioner deals in and the products mentioned in the Udyam Registration Certificate are some of the items for which empanelment has been sought by the e-Tender Notice.

4. In the Bidding Document to the e-Tender Notice, the qualification/eligibility criteria of the bidders and the documentary proof needed for the purpose of qualification / eligibility criteria were laid down in Clause 3 thereof. For ready reference, Clause 3 of the Bidding Document are reproduced hereinbelow :-

Qualification / eligibility Criteria of the bidders :

Following documentary proof is needed :

3[a] Manufacturers/Suppliers should be a registered manufacturer of Handloom and accessories or authorize supplier of the manufacturers of the relevant goods. The bidder should state in what capacity he / she is participating in the bidding process as a manufacturer / supplier. The bidders in case of Registered under MSME, he / she should submit the up-to-date Udyam Registration certificate from the competent authority and clearly mention that he / she is a manufacturer of Handloom & accessories.

[b] The average annual financial turnovers during the last three years i.e. 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23 should not be less than Rs. 50.00 Lakh. The audited / certified balance sheet should be submitted along with IT return files for the years as stated above.

3[c] The Manufacturers / Suppliers should have experience of supply of Handlooms & Handloom Accessories of an aggregated value of minimum Rs. 10.00 lakh [Rupees Ten Lakh] only during the last three financial years. The supply completion certificate issued by the competent authority should be submitted as proof of experience.

3[d] The successful bidders will have to exhibit sample of each item after opening of financial bid and before sign of deed of agreem

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top