Disqualification due to blacklisting applies to partnerships where designated partners impact eligibility, underscoring the authority's interpretation of tender conditions in public interest.

JUDGMENT :

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J.

1. The petitioner is a limited partnership firm constituted under the provisions of Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008. The grievance highlighted by the petitioner in this writ petition is against Ext.P6 decision taken by the Tender Evaluation Committee of the 1^st respondent (the Administration of Lakshadweep), disqualifying the petitioner from participating in the tender process notified as per Ext.P4. The reason for disqualifying the petitioner was that, one of the designated partners of the petitioner firm was found to be blacklisted by the Central Public Works Department, which attracts as a disqualification as per the tender documents.

2. The facts which led to the filing of the tender notification are as follows: As per Ext.P4 notification dated 7.10.2025, the 3rd respondent invited tenders from the eligible person and entities, for “Transportation and Handling of HSD/Lub Oil filled/empty Barrels and General Cargos at Beypore Sub Division Office, Lakshadweep Electricity Department during the year, 2025-2026”. In response to Ext.P4, the petitioner submitted a tender and Ext.P7 is the “Proforma of Declaration of Blacklisting” furnished by the petitioner stating that, neither the petitioner nor any partner, involved in the management of the said firm, either in his individual capacity or as proprietor or managing partner of any firm or concern, have or has been placed on black list or holiday list declared by Lakshadweep District Department of Electricity or by any Department of the State or Central Government or any other Public Works Undertaking.

3. The tender was submitted by the petitioner on 28.10.2025, which was the last date fixed for submission of the tender. On 29.10.2025, the 3rdrespondent, as per the decision taken by the Tender Evaluation Committee, which is uploaded Ext.P6 in the web portal, disqualified the petitioner. The reason stated in Ext.P6 was that Sri. K.V. Sankarankutty, one of the designated partners who was previously a contractor of the Department for the same work, has been debarred from participating in any work of the Department for a period of two years. Thus, it was found that the petitioner is not eligible to participate in the tender process.

4. The case of the petitioner is that, the order debarring Sri.K.V. Sankarankutty, who was one of the designated partners of the petitioner firm, was passed on 17.10.2025. Immediately on the next day, the partnership was re-constituted as evidenced by Ext.P2 supplemental limited liability partnership agreement and necessary approval from the Registrar of Companies was also obtained as per Ext.P2 on 22.10.2025. As per the re-constitution deed, Sri. K.V.Sankarankutty retired from the partnership along with another person and a new partner named Moosa Anas, was inducted as a designated partner in the place of Sri. K.V.Sankarankutty. Therefore, it is the case of the petitioner that, as on the date of submission of bid on 28.10.2025, neither the petitioner-firm nor the partners of the said firm, were suffering from any disqualification by way of blacklisting and hence Ext.P6 decision rejecting the technical bid of the petitioner is not legally sustainable. It is also the case of the petitioner that, going by clause 6.7 of the tender documents, the stipulation contained therein that, the “bidder” shall not be either blacklisted or debarred by Central Government or any of the State/UT