The court is examining whether the introduction of new qualifying conditions after the tender submission deadline violates Section 14 of the RTPP Act, 2012, which mandates that only criteria specified in the original bidding documents be used for evaluation.

Order

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the last date for the submission of the tender documents was 27.03.2026.

2. It is next submitted that subsequent to the expiry of the aforesaid deadline, the respondent-authorities arbitrarily issued the impugned communication dated 24.04.2026, introducing fresh, tailor-made conditions purportedly designed to maliciously oust the petitioner from the bidding process. The newly inserted conditions read as follows:

“1. The firm neither has been debarred/blacklisted nor any debarment/blacklisting proceeding had been initiated by the Government of India/ State Government/Public Undertaking or any other organization across the country.

2. No complaint has been filed and banned for participation in future tender in any State.

3. No action initiated/proposed against the firm during the Legislative Assembly session of any State Government.

4. The information submitted by the firm is true and correct, and that in the event of such information is found to be false, the firm's bid shall be rejected and appropriate action will be initiated against the firm in accordance with the rules.”

3. Learned counsel submits that the subsequent insertion of these conditions is per se illegal and barred by the provisions of the Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Act, 2012 (for short, ‘RTPP Act’). Relying upon the statutory mandate of Section 14 of the RTPP Act, it is submitted that no criteria, procedure, or condition other than those explicitly mentioned in the original bidding document shall be utilized by the procuring entity for evaluating the bids or for the purposes of qualifying/disqualifying a bidder.

4. It is further submitted that if the impugned arbitrary conditions are struck down, the petitioner would rightfully hold the first claim to be declared as the successful bidder. It has been apprised to this Court that as on date, no third-party rights have been created pursuant to the impugned tender process.

5. Heard the preliminary submissions advanced by the learned counsel.

6. Issue notices to the respondents.

7. On the specific directions of this Court, Mr. Sankalp Vijay, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to supply a copy of the present petition in the office of Mr. Manoj Sharma, learned AAG, during the course of the day.

9. The concerned Officer-in-Charge is directed to remain present before this Court on the next date of hearing, along with the relevant records pertaining to the impugned tender process.

10. List the matter on 01.05.2026 in the supplementary cause list after reflecting the name of Mr. Manoj Sharma, learned AAG, as counsel for the respondents.

11. In the meantime, taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that no third-party rights shall be created by the respondents qua the tender in question till further orders of this Court.