In tender matters, constitutional courts must exercise judicial restraint and refuse to interfere unless the decision-making process is tainted by malafide, arbitrariness, or irrationality, recognizing that technical evaluation is best left to the expertise of the tender-inviting authority.

ORDER

This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed assailing the order dated 31/07/2025 (Annexure-P/1), whereby respondents have declared the petitioner disqualified in technical bid.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner is a registered Startup and MSME and is exempted from past experience requirements under prevailing Policies i.e. Public Procurement Policy for MSMEs, 2012. Petitioner is engaged in the business of cardboard manufacturing and is entitled to get protection flowing from Part III of the Constitution of India being its fundamental right. The Security Printing and Minting Corporation of India Limited (SPMCIL), a wholly owned Schedule A Mini Ratna Category-I Company of Government of India, was incorporated on 13th January 2006, which falls within the definition of State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The management, control, maintenance and operations of erstwhile 9 production units under the Currency and Coinage Division, Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, was transferred to SPMCIL with effect from 10th February, 2006. SPMCIL is engaged in manufacture/ production of Currency and Bank Notes, Security Paper, Non-Judicial Stamp Papers, Postal Stamps and Stationery, Travel documents i.e., Passport, Visa, Security certificates, Cheques, Bonds, Warrant, Special Certificates with security features, Security Inks, normal circulation and commemorative coins, Medallions, Refining of Gold and Silver and Assay of Precious Metals. The respondent, Security Printing and Minting Corporation of India Limited (SPMCIL) issued a tender bearing No.GEM/2024/B/5314830 on the Government E-Market Place, dated 20th September 2024, for the work titled as "Procurement of Cardboard sheet". Total quantity required by the respondent was 1.44 L.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondents themselves have submitted a report that bidder firm is an MSME, therefore firm is exempted from past experience. But firm has provided past sales and purchase invoices for various products. Petitioner was informed by an E-mail dated 02/01/2025 asking it to submit experience documents but they were not properly considered by the Authorities and thereafter on 27th March, 2025, again an E-mail was received stating that they have not received any response from the petitioner for site visit and they would be sending their representatives on 5th April 2025 and if the petitioner does not confirm the same, petitioner would be disqualified from participating in the tender proceedings. Petitioner sent an E-mail on 28th March 2025, stating that he has already sent an E-mail on 20th February 2025 acknowledging their site visit which the Authorities failed to consider. Petitioner has also sent a clarification on 28th March 2025 correcting factual aspects clarifying that manufacturing unit is located in Borgaon, M.P. and not in Nagpur as mistakenly mentioned, and providing evidence of prior communication regarding site visit but to the surprise of the petitioner, he was served with a communication on 31st July 2025 from the portal, which shows that petitioner was disqualified in technical bit as firm is not found capable in capacity and capability for manufacturing of tender items.

4. It is argued that the entire proceedings have not been carried out in transparent manner. The production capacity of the petitioner is 2MT per day which is mo