Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions Challenging Disqualification from Tender Process for Supply of Food Kits for Gauri-Ganpati Festival, Emphasizes “Judicial Interference in Tender Matters is Limited”

Court’s Decision:
The Bombay High Court dismissed two writ petitions challenging the disqualification of petitioners from the tender process for supplying food kits (“Anandacha Shidha”) for the Gauri-Ganpati Festival. The Court upheld the decision of the Tender Evaluation Committee, finding no grounds for interference.

Facts of the Case:
The petitioners, Just Universal Pvt. Ltd. and Indo Allied Protein Foods Pvt. Ltd., participated in a tender process initiated by the State of Maharashtra through the Food, Civil Supplies, and Consumer Protection Department. The tender was for the supply of food kits to approximately 1.56 crore beneficiaries in Maharashtra during the Gauri-Ganpati Festival in September 2024. The tender required bidders to meet specific eligibility criteria, including providing at least 300 laborers across 70 locations in government or semi-government establishments within Maharashtra, with the work valued at not less than ₹25 crores.

The petitioners were disqualified by the Tender Evaluation Committee on the grounds that they failed to meet the necessary experience and qualification requirements.

Issues:
The primary issues were whether the petitioners were wrongfully disqualified from the tender process and whether the interpretation of the tender conditions by the Tender Evaluation Committee was arbitrary or unreasonable.

Petitioners’ Arguments:
The petitioners argued that they had provided sufficient documentation, including experience certificates, that met the eligibility criteria.

They contended that the disqualification was based on an incorrect interpretation of the term “providing laborers” and that the Tender Evaluation Committee had failed to properly assess their qualifications.

Respondents’ Arguments:
The respondents, including the State of Maharashtra, argued that the petitioners did not meet the specific requirements of the tender, particularly the condition related to providing laborers across multiple locations.

Court’s Analysis:
The Court analyzed the eligibility criteria and the documentation submitted by the petitioners. It concluded that the interpretation of the term “providing laborers” by the Tender Evaluation Committee was reasonable and aligned with the purpose of the tender. The Court found that the petitioners’ experience did not satisfy the specific requirements outlined in the tender.

The Court also emphasized that judicial interference in tender matters is limited to ensuring that the decision-making process is not arbitrary, irrational, or tainted with mala fides. In this case, the Court found no such grounds for interference.

Conclusion:
The Bombay High Court dismissed both petitions, upholding the disqualification of the petitioners from the tender process.