The High Court of Judicature at Bombay addressed the disqualification of a bidder in a government tender process. The Court examined whether the conditions related to green building certification were clear and whether the disqualification of the petitioner was justified. The petitioner argued that the certification requirements were vague and not communicated clearly, while the respondents maintained that the conditions were explicit and the petitioner failed to meet them. Ultimately, the Court upheld the petitioner's disqualification, emphasizing the importance of adhering to precise tender conditions.

2. Background

• Tender Notice: On 08.09.2023, the Public Works Department issued an 'E' tender notice for the construction of the Collector Office building at Vishwas Nagar, Aurangabad.
• Certification Requirement: A corrigendum issued on 09.09.2023 added a condition requiring bidders to upload a 'green building certificate' issued by the Indian Green Building Council (IGBC).

3. Petitioner's Argument

• Vagueness of Certification Requirement: The petitioner claimed that the condition requiring certification was vague, especially regarding whether a pre-certification was sufficient or a final certification was necessary.
• Communication with Respondents: The petitioner responded to the tender requirements but was ultimately disqualified for not providing a final green building certificate.

4. Respondents' Defense

• Right to Amend Tender Conditions: The respondents argued that they had the right to modify tender conditions and that the petitioner's failure to meet the clear certification requirement justified their disqualification.

5. Court's Analysis

• Examination of Tender Conditions: The Court reviewed the changes to the tender conditions and the arguments regarding the clarity of the certification requirement.
• Judicial Review Limitations: The Court emphasized that its role in tender disputes is limited to examining whether the decision-making process was lawful and not to interfere with administrative decisions unless there is clear evidence of unfairness or bias.

6. Judgment

• Disqualification Upheld: The Court upheld the disqualification of the petitioner, finding that the certification requirements were clear and that the petitioner's bid did not comply with them.
• Implications: The judgment highlights the importance of clarity in tender conditions and the need for bidders to meet all specified requirements.

7. Conclusion

• Final Remarks: The case serves as a reminder of the critical role of precise communication in tender processes and the high standards bidders must meet to qualify.