Judicial review of tender conditions is restricted to cases of arbitrariness or unreasonableness, reinforcing that the authority determining eligibility criteria has the discretion and expertise in contractual matters.

ORDER :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

1. The instant writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed challenging the condition as stipulated in the e-tender particularly Section VI (a) and VI (g) on the ground that such condition has been stipulated only to deprive the eligibility of the writ petitioner.

2. The facts of the case, leading of filing of the instant writ petition which requires to be enumerated, read as under:

3. The respondent-Jharkhand Education Project Council (JEPC) floated a tender on 08.05.2024 for supply of school bags for children studying in Government Schools in Class I to VII for 2024-25 in the State of Jharkhand. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner, being an avid manufacturer of school bags, was desirous to participate in the tender process but was debarred from even participating in the tender process despite his past experience in the said area in the garb of condition as incorporated under Section VI (a) and VI (g) of the bid documents. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted by referring Section VI (a) and VI (g) of the bid documents that in the bid document specific condition has been inserted stipulating therein that any company incorporated in India, registered Indian Partnership Firm (including liability partnership), limited liability partnership and/or Company may participate in the bid. The bidders should be a manufacturer of School bags. Further, the bidders shall have minimum average annual initial turnover of Rs. 80 crores during the last five financial years i.e., 2018-19 to 2022-23.

5. The aforesaid two clauses have been questioned on the ground that the same has been inserted only to exclude the participation of the present petitioner as such the same is highly arbitrary and illegal.

6. Mr. Krishna Murari, learned counsel for the respondents-JEPC has vehemently argued in opposition and submitted that such condition is stipulated in the bid document in order to see the viability of the one or the other bidder, who are intending to participate in the bid so that the quality and standard of the nature of the goods, herein the school bags, is to be assessed.

7. Further ground has been taken that so far as insertion of the conditions in the bid document is concerned that is within the exclusive domain of the authorities concerned and merely because one or other bidders are not fulfilling the eligibility criteria the same cannot be changed and cannot be said to be hit by Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

8. Further argument has been advanced that during pendency of the writ petition, the bid has been finalized and even the work order has been issued in favour of successful bidder.

9. This Court has heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone across the pleadings made in the writ petition as also the relevant conditions as stipulated in the bid.

10. The issue, which has been raised by the present writ petition, is the conditions stipulated under Section VI (a) and VI (g) of the bid documents under the caption ‘Eligibility Criteria’, which are quoted as under:

“Section VI: Eligibility Criteria The prospective bidders shall have to meet the following eligibility criteria:

(a).Any company incorporated in India, registered Indian Partnership firm (including limited liability partnership), limited liability partnership and/or companies may participate in the bid. The bidder should be a manufacturer of school bags;

(g).A bidder shall have a minimum annual average turnover of Rs. 80 cr