Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a tender notification dated 30.07.2025 issued by the Bengaluru Solid Waste Management Limited (BSWML) for 33 packages covering the collection and transfer of solid waste in Bengaluru. The petitioners, eighteen small‑scale solid waste management contractors who had provided services to the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) for nearly a decade, challenged the tender by way of a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. They had previously been engaged in primary collection of segregated wet waste, sanitary waste, and street sweeping waste as well as secondary transportation across various wards. Earlier, tenders for solid waste management had been issued for 89 packages covering 243 wards. The first tender was issued on 28.09.2022, and a second on 21.01.2023. The second tender was challenged in WP No. 2935 of 2023. During the pendency of that writ, a third tender was issued on 07.11.2024, again for 89 packages. The High Court, while disposing of WP No. 2935 of 2023 on 22.04.2025, upheld the third tender and recorded the submission of the learned Advocate General that all contractors could participate. The respondents had filed an affidavit on 13.11.2024 stating that the 89‑package tender was scientifically designed. However, the respondents subsequently withdrew the third tender and issued the impugned fourth tender with only 33 packages, each comprising 7‑8 wards. This clubbing increased the package values from the range of Rs.400‑500 lakhs to Rs.1400‑2500 lakhs, thereby raising the financial and technical eligibility criteria, including higher turnover, equipment, and manpower requirements. The petitioners argued that they could not meet these enhanced criteria, rendering them ineligible, and that even forming a consortium of up to five members, as permitted by the tender, would not suffice for some packages. They contended that the impugned tender was contrary to the respondents’ own affidavit, the court’s earlier observations, and the manual of the Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India, which advocates decentralized community‑level solid waste management. They relied upon the Supreme Court’s decision in National Highways Authority of India v. Gwalior‑Jhansi Expressway Limited (2018) 8 SCC 243 to emphasize the need for transparency, equal opportunity, and encouragement of competition in tender processes. The petitioners sought a writ of certiorari to quash the tender notification in its entirety. The High Court heard the matter, reserved orders on 27.10.2025, and pronounced judgment on 03.11.2025. The available text of the judgment does not include the court’s reasoning or the final operative order; it primarily records the contentions of the petitioners.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the tender notification No. DGM-1/BSWML/TEND/08/2025-26 dated 30.07.2025 is liable to be quashed on grounds of illegality, arbitrariness, violation of previous court orders, and non‑compliance with the decentralization policy for solid waste management
Case Details
2025 LawText (KAR) (11) 12
Writ Petition No. 27474 of 2025 (GM-TEN)
Udaya Holla (Sr. Advocate) for Petitioners, Anukanksha Kalkeri (HCGP) for R1, K. Shashi Kiran Shetty (Sr. Advocate) for R2-R4
Sri B S Kiran Kumar & Ors.
State of Karnataka & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging a tender notification
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the Request for Proposal/Invitation for Tenders No. DGM-1/BSWML/TEND/08/2025-26 dated 30.07.2025 in respect of all 33 packages
Filing Reason
The petitioners, small contractors, were aggrieved by the reduction of packages from 89 to 33 by clubbing wards, which increased the financial and technical eligibility criteria, making them ineligible to bid and favouring large contractors
Previous Decisions
WP No. 2935 of 2023 was disposed of on 22.04.2025 upholding a tender dated 07.11.2024; a review petition RP No. 239 of 2025 is pending
Issues
Whether the tender notification dated 30.07.2025 is illegal and arbitrary for clubbing wards and increasing eligibility criteria
Whether the tender violates previous court orders and the principle of decentralization as per the Ministry of Urban Development manual
Whether the tender process violates the principles of equal opportunity and transparency
Submissions/Arguments
The impugned tender, by reducing packages to 33 and clubbing wards, increased financial and technical eligibility criteria beyond the petitioners’ capacity, effectively excluding them and favouring large contractors
The tender was contrary to the respondents’ own affidavit stating that the earlier 89‑package tender was scientifically designed, and contrary to the court’s observations in previous proceedings
The Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India manual advocates decentralized solid waste management at the community level, which the impugned tender disregards
Reliance was placed on National Highways Authority of India v. Gwalior‑Jhansi Expressway Limited (2018) 8 SCC 243 to argue that the tender process must be transparent and provide equal opportunity to all bidders
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioners claim to be Municipal Solid Waste Management contractors providing services to the BBMP in various capacities over the years, including primary collection of segregated wet waste, sanitary waste and street sweeping waste, as well as secondary transportation of segregated wet and street sweeping waste in various wards of Bangalore city.
Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, Order or direction, quashing the request for Proposal/Invitation for Tenders bearing No. DGM-1/BSWML/Tend/08/2025-26 dated 30.07.2025 in respect of all 33 packages.
The conduct is illegal and contrary to the affidavit of the respondent No.2 dated 13.11.2024.
The objective of tender process is not only to adhere to a transparent mechanism but to encourage competition and give equal opportunity to all tenderers with the end result of getting a fair offer or value for money.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed WP No. 27474 of 2025 challenging the tender notification dated 30.07.2025. Earlier, they had challenged a previous tender in WP No. 2935 of 2023, which was disposed of on 22.04.2025 upholding a tender dated 07.11.2024. A review petition RP No. 239 of 2025 is pending. The present writ petition came up for orders and was reserved on 27.10.2025; judgment was pronounced on 03.11.2025. The available text only records the petitioners’ arguments.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226, Article 227
