Case Note & Summary
The judgment pertains to two writ petitions filed by Dr. R. Venkatesh challenging tender notifications issued by the State of Goa for establishing dialysis centres in government hospitals. The petitioner had earlier filed an affidavit in support of a PIL (WP No.359/2007) concerning deplorable conditions in government hospitals. Subsequently, the government issued tenders for dialysis centres, and the petitioner alleged that the eligibility criteria were tailor-made to exclude him and favour a particular bidder. The court examined whether the tender conditions were arbitrary or malafide. The court held that the conditions regarding minimum turnover and experience were reasonable and within the government's discretion. The petitioner failed to provide any evidence of malafides. The court also noted that the petitioner was not a bidder and had no locus to challenge the tender. Consequently, both writ petitions were dismissed.
Headnote
A) Tender Law - Judicial Review - Scope of Interference - Courts should not interfere with tender conditions unless they are arbitrary, discriminatory, or malafide - The court held that the eligibility criteria requiring minimum turnover and experience were not arbitrary and were within the government's domain (Paras 2-10). B) Public Interest Litigation - Locus Standi - Third Party Affidavit - A person who filed an affidavit in support of a PIL cannot later challenge the same tender conditions as a petitioner - The court noted that the petitioner was not a bidder and had no locus to challenge the tender (Paras 2-5). C) Tender Law - Malafides - Burden of Proof - Allegations of malafides must be proved with concrete evidence - The court found no evidence of malafides or tailor-making of conditions (Paras 6-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the tender conditions in the impugned notifications are arbitrary, malafide, or tailor-made to exclude the petitioner, and whether the government complied with tender guidelines.
Final Decision
Both writ petitions are dismissed.
Law Points
- Tender conditions
- judicial review
- public interest litigation
- eligibility criteria
- malafides
- arbitrariness
- government contracts
