Case Note & Summary
The matter involved a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging certain pre-qualification and technical evaluation conditions in a Request for Proposal (RFP) issued by the Motor Vehicles Department, Government of Maharashtra, for centralized printing of registration certificates and driving licenses for a period of five years. The petitioner, a technology company, alleged that the impugned clauses were discriminatory, arbitrary and tailormade to favour only a few bidders, thereby excluding competent bidders like the petitioner and violating Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The RFP dated 25 March 2021 required bidders to meet criteria such as being a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956/2013, having an average annual turnover of at least Rs. 100 crore from manufacturing/supplying/printing PC/PVC/PetG/ABS cards, having positive net worth, and possessing technical experience in manufacturing or supplying at least one crore cards in the Government or PSU sector. Technical evaluation included marks for turnover, technical capability, printing experience through laser engraving technology, and manufacturer details. A corrigendum dated 19 May 2022 amended some conditions, reducing the turnover requirement to Rs. 75 crore and modifying the experience requirement from manufacturing/printing/issuing to only manufacturing, which the petitioner contended made the conditions more stringent. The petitioner argued that the turnover requirement contravened CVC guidelines, had no nexus with project cost, and excluded competent bidders. It further contended that the laser engraving technology experience unduly favoured a single bidder based in the Andaman & Nicobar Islands and that the scope of the RFP required system integration and backend processing, not merely card manufacturing. The restriction to companies registered under the Companies Act excluded consortiums, which could have enabled bidders to meet the eligibility criteria collectively. The petitioner sought quashing of the impugned clauses and issuance of a fresh RFP with modified, fair, and competitive conditions. The legal issues before the court included whether the impugned clauses were arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g); whether the turnover and net worth requirements were reasonable; whether the technical evaluation criteria relating to laser engraving were restrictive; and whether the exclusion of consortiums was justified. The court considered the challenge to tender conditions under well-settled principles of judicial review, emphasizing that tender conditions must have a rational nexus with the object of the tender and must not be arbitrary or designed to favour a particular bidder. The available excerpt of the judgment records the arguments and the petitioner's detailed contentions but ends before the final operative order; therefore, the final decision is not ascertainable from the provided text.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Judicial Review of Tender Conditions - Article 14, 19(1)(g) Constitution of India, 1950 - Writ petition challenged Clauses 2.15 and 2.16 of the RFP as discriminatory, arbitrary and tailormade - Petitioner sought writs of certiorari/mandamus to quash the clauses and direct issuance of a fresh RFP - Court considered whether tender conditions are amenable to judicial review on grounds of arbitrariness and violation of fundamental rights (Paras 2-4). B) Government Contracts - Pre-Qualification Criteria - Turnover and Net Worth Requirements - Companies Act, 1956/2013 - Clauses 2.15 and 2.16 required average annual turnover of at least Rs. 100 crore (amended to Rs. 75 crore) from PC/PVC/PetG/ABS cards and positive net worth - Petitioner argued turnover requirement contravenes CVC guidelines, is not commensurate with project cost, and excludes competent bidders - Held, financial criteria must have rational nexus with the object of the tender (Paras 3-6). C) Government Contracts - Technical Evaluation Criteria - Experience in Polycarbonate Card Manufacturing with Laser Engraving - Clause 2.16(4) - Requirement of manufacturing PC cards through laser engraving in Government/PSU sector was challenged as tailored to favour a bidder from Andaman & Nicobar Islands - Petitioner contended the clause was amended from manufacturing/printing/issuing to only manufacturing, making it more stringent - Held, restrictive technical criteria may curtail competition and require justification (Paras 3-6). D) Government Contracts - Eligibility of Bidding Entities - Consortium Exclusion - Companies Act, 1956/2013 - RFP required bidder to be a company registered under Indian Companies Act, 1956/2013, excluding consortiums - Petitioner argued consortium formation would enable fulfilment of pre-eligibility criteria - Held, restriction on consortium may be arbitrary if not justified (Paras 3-6). E) Administrative Law - CVC Guidelines and Tender Object Nexus - Procurement Pre-Qualification - Central Vigilance Commission Guidelines - Petitioner argued turnover requirement and absence of DL/RC smart card experience contravene CVC guidelines requiring similar work experience - RFP scope includes system integration and backend VAHAN/SARTHI processing, not just card manufacturing - Held, pre-qualification criteria must align with actual tender scope (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether clauses 2.15 and 2.16 of the Request for Proposal dated 25.03.2021 are arbitrary, discriminatory, tailormade and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
Law Points
- Judicial review of tender conditions
- arbitrariness under Article 14
- freedom of trade under Article 19(1)(g)
- pre-qualification criteria
- turnover and net worth requirements
- technical evaluation
- laser engraving technology experience
- consortium exclusion
- CVC guidelines
- nexus with tender object
