Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
SHEKHAR B.SARAF, PRASHANT KUMAR
Avani Paridhi Energy And Communications Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Authorized Signatory Shri Aditya Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Environment Forest/Climate Change Lko. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to tender process under article 226. (Para 2) |
| 2. grounds for challenging tender based on participation. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's restrained approach in reviewing tender matters. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. judgment on the failure to secure the tender. (Para 11) |
| 5. final dismissal of the writ petition. (Para 12) |
Judgment :
2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by the technical evaluation dated September 15, 2025 and the entire tender process on the ground that the said tender process is not in terms of the mandate of the Government Order dated 19.05.2023.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner relies on paragraph 23 of a judgment of the High Court of Uttarakhand in Nandaur Haldwani Ujjwal Dharam Kanta Owners Society v. Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation and others reported in MANU/UC/0501/2023 to submit that if the petitioner has protested and thereafter participated, he is not estopped from filing a writ petition. The said paragraph of the judgment is delineated below :-
5. We have examined the letter dated 25.08.2025 supposedly written by the petitioner i
Judicial review in tender matters is limited; unsuccessful bidders cannot later challenge tender conditions they participated under.
Judicial review in public procurement is limited; courts refrain from interference unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or bad faith is established.
Tender authorities must adhere to statutory criteria and act transparently; courts will not interfere unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or malafide conduct is presented.
Point of Law- Court in all the aforesaid decisions has cautioned time and again that courts should exercise a lot of restraint while exercising their powers of judicial review in contractual or comme....
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 c....
The court affirmed that stringent eligibility criteria in public tender processes cannot violate statutory relaxations for Start-ups, emphasizing limited grounds for judicial review.
The court upheld the authority's discretion in setting eligibility criteria for tenders, emphasizing that judicial review is limited to cases of arbitrariness or unreasonableness.
Judicial review of tender conditions is limited; courts should not interfere unless actions are arbitrary, discriminatory, or mala fide, ensuring public interest is prioritized.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
