JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the 2nd respondent in e-mail communication dated 28.10.2021 in rejecting the bid application of the petitioner and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to include and permit the petitioner to participate in Tender No.SRCC/PT/090/TNSO/2021-22 bearing Tender ID No.2021_SROTN_139613_1.)

1. The present petition has been filed challenging the rejection of the petitioner's bid application by the 2nd respondent.

2. The petitioner is a partnership firm, viz., a Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) Unit, involved in the manufacture of metal drums and the unit was established in the year 2020, which is a “Startup Unit”, as certified by the Department of Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade and the unit is involved in the supply of metal drums.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the invitation of tender by the 2nd respondent for the supply of 160 Litres MS (24G-0.63 MM) empty bitumen drums to bitumen drum filling/packing plant at Chennai, the petitioner submitted its bid application through electronic mode within the time prescribed by the 2nd respondent.

4. However, to the shock and surprise of the petitioner, vide e-mail dated 28.10.21, the 2nd respondent rejected the bid of the petitioner on the ground that the registered partnership deed was not submitted. It is averred by the petitioner that a letter was addressed to the 2nd respondent by e-mail on 28.10.21 explaining that the firm registration would take a minimum of one year as per the Indian Partnership (Maharashtra Amendment) Act, 1984, as the petitioner had applied for the same only on 18.11.2020 and would be getting the registration certificate on 19.11.2021.

5. Inspite of the same, without properly considering the reply, the 2nd respondent, vide e-mail dated 29.10.21, rejected the bid application on the ground that the registered partnership deed, as is mandated under clause 8 (e)(d) of the tender notification has not been submitted. Though the petitioner, through his communication, brought to the notice of the 2nd respondent that its unit is a startup unit and as per the certificate of the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, registration deed is not mandatory, however, the 2nd respondent, without considering the said reply, vide communication dated 1.11.21 rejected the said reply of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said impugned order of rejection passed by the 2nd respondent, the present petition has been filed by the petitioner.

6. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the whole crux of the issue squarely falls under clause 8 (e)(d) of the tender notification, which prescribes certain documents to be annexed along with the bid application. It is the submission of the learned senior counsel that though the said condition has been laid down in the tender, however, the said condition has to be read in relation to the policy circular No.1(2)(1)/2016-MA dated 10th March, 2016 of the Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises of the Government of India, where relaxation has been granted in the norms for Startups and Micro & Small Enterprises in public procurement. However, the 2nd respondent has not properly appreciated the said policy circular, but has merely gone by the tender conditions, which is grossly erroneous.

7. It is the further submission of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was the successful bidder relating to a similar tender floated by the Mathura Unit of the Indian Oil Corporation and the conditions prescribed in the tender therein were identical and the petitioner had submitted only the documents as were submitted before the 2nd respondent and the said documents were taken note of and the petitioner was declared as the successful bidder, though the petitioner had not tak