The court examines the validity of technical bid rejections in government tenders and the necessity of communicating specific reasons for such rejections to the bidder to ensure transparency.

ORDER

Date : 09.07.2026

Heard Mr. R. Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. R. Devi, learned CGC appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5.

2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the rejection of the technical bid of the petitioner by way of portal information dated 01.07.2026, uploaded at 16:45 hours.

3. The petitioner had participated in the NIT bearing No. Mech-LMG-ET-14-2025-26 for the work “Turnkey contract for the work of Supply, Installation, Commissioning of Plant/Equipment & Related Infrastructure and Operation of Mechanized Laundry at Badarpur, Collection of soiled linen from coaches from Agartala, Silchar, Sairang Railway station and loading of washed linen into coaches at Agartala, Silchar, Sairang Railway station for a period of 10 years under BOOT (Build-Own-Operate-Transfer) Basis and Transportation of linen from BOOT Laundry to nominated Stations including onboard distribution of linen to passenger, blanket repair & stitching of curtains”.

4. The petitioner projects that the rejection of the technical bid was on the flimsy ground that the banker’s reference was not certified by the Chartered Accountant and in this connection, the petitioner places reliance on a correspondence bearing No. M.313/C&W/286/SBD/Corres, dated 09.07.2019 issued by the South Central Railway, which, amongst others, clarifies that the latest audited balance sheet certified by Chartered Accountant with her stamp signature and membership number and/or banking reference shall be submitted by the bidder along with bid.

5. Accordingly, it is submitted that so far as the balance sheet is concerned, the same has to be certified by a Chartered Accountant, but the banking reference need not be certified by a Chartered Accountant. It is further submitted that the online disclosure in the portal regarding rejection of the technical bid did not contain any reason and though the petitioner had submitted representations dated 30.06.2026 and 01.07.2026, no disclosure of the reasons was made.

6. At this stage, the learned CGC has produced a copy of a communication dated 01.07.2026, bearing No. LDM/TC/BOOT Laundry/BPB/2024-25. The contents of the said communication are extracted below:

“Sir,
With reference to your bid submitted against Tender No. Mech-LMG-ET-14-2025-26, it is informed that the Tender Committee, upon evaluation of your Technical Bid, recorded the following:
M/s Leotech Process Krishna does not satisfy the prescribed Technical Eligibility Criteria and has failed to submit documents in your bid to prove that you have completed works which conform to the definition of "similar nature of work" as per the tender document.
You have failed to submit valid documents in your bid to prove your T2 eligibility or liquidity as required as per the tender documents.
This is for your information.”

7. In response, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has specific instructions to the effect that the said communication dated 01.07.2026 and/or any other communication disclosing the reasons for rejection of the technical bid has not been communicated to the petitioner.

8. Issue notice including notice on the prayer for interim relief returnable on 15.07.2026.

9. In view of the urgency expressed, the petitioner is permitted to serve notice upon respondent No. 6 through e-mail.

10. We direct the learned CGC to obtain the e-mail address of respondent No. 6 and communicate the same to the learned counsel for the petitioner by 10.07.2026. In the meantime, the petitioner may take steps thro