Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
T.MADHAVI DEVI
Rosmerta Technologies Limited – Appellant
Versus
State Of Telangana, Represented By Its Principal Secretary, Food And Civil Supplies Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks mandamus against tender criteria. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner's challenges on rejection of technical bid. (Para 4 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. respondent's reliance on tender compliance. (Para 7 , 11) |
| 4. arguments on legal precedents regarding tender fairness. (Para 9 , 12) |
| 5. court upholds tender compliance and denies arbitrariness. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. final ruling on petitions. (Para 17 , 18) |
ORDER :
T.MADHAVI DEVI, J.
1. The W.P.No.9197 of 2025 was filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the Clause/Section of Page 8: B1 Pre- Qualification Criteria mandating the bidder to have a registered office in Telangana to participate in the tender bearing No. CCS Ref.No.IT-2/910/2025, dated 10.03.2025 for ‘Procurement of Personalized PVC QR Code Smart Ration Cards for Food and Civil Supplies Department, Telangana’ bid as highhanded, illegal and arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently to suspend the same and to pass such other order or orders in the interest of justice.
2. When matter was taken up for admission, this Court, after hearing both the parties, vide orders dated 25.03.2025 had directed the respondents to open all the tenders including that of the petiti
The court affirmed that executive decisions in tendering must be devoid of arbitrariness, while confirming that non-compliance with technical criteria justifies rejection of a bid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the disqualification of a bidder must be justified, and an unsuccessful bidder cannot challenge the qualification of other bidders.
The court upheld the tendering authority's discretion in setting eligibility criteria, emphasizing limited judicial review focused on procedural fairness rather than the merits of the decision.
Judicial review in tender matters is limited to assessing procedural fairness, not the merits of the tender conditions, which are determined by the tendering authority.
Tender authorities must adhere to statutory criteria and act transparently; courts will not interfere unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or malafide conduct is presented.
Tender authorities have broad discretion in evaluating bids, and a failure to comply with mandatory document submission requirements justifies disqualification unless clear malice is shown.
Judicial review of tendering decisions is limited to assessing legality, with courts refraining from substituting the tender authority's decisions unless in cases of illegality or manifest arbitrarin....
Judicial review in tender matters is limited; rejection based on non-compliance with tender conditions is not arbitrary.
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
