Mku Limited And Anr vs. Union Of INDIA And Others
Held
The Court held that the requirement of an Industrial License issued by DPIIT was a valid eligibility criterion for the tenders. The license issued by DoC, even if delegated, did not satisfy the specific requirement of the tender, and thus the disqualification was justified.
Facts
Petitioners, who are Export Oriented Units (EOUs), sought to participate in tenders for procurement of defense equipment. They possessed Industrial Licenses issued by the Department of Commerce (DoC), but the tender required licenses issued by the Department of Promotion of Industry & Internal Trade (DPIIT). The respondents disqualified the petitioners based on this discrepancy.
Key Issues
Whether an Industrial License issued by the Department of Commerce (DoC) is equivalent to one issued by the Department of Promotion of Industry & Internal Trade (DPIIT) for tender eligibility. Whether the disqualification of EOUs for not possessing a DPIIT-issued license was arbitrary.
Sections Cited
Industries (Development and Regulations) Act, 1951, Registration and Licensing of Industrial Undertakings Rules, 1952
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
W.P.(C) 4748/2025 & connected matters
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI %
Judgment reserved on: 28.11.2025 Judgment delivered on: 23.12.2025
+ W.P.(C) 4748/2025, CM APPLs 21775-21777/2025, CM APPL 47301/2025 & CM APPL 53787/2025 + W.P.(C) 4750/2025, CM APPLs 21780-21782/2025, CM APPL 39747/2025 & CM APPL 53877/2025 + W.P.(C) 4755/2025, CM APPLs 21888-21890/2025 & CM APPL 53870/2025
MKU LIMITED AND ANR
.....Petitioners
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
.....Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners : Ms. Madhavi Divan, Senior Advocate and Mr. Manish Vashisht, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anirudh Sharma, Mr. Rajiv Dalal, Mr. Sanjeev Kr Sharma, Mr. Varun Kesharwani, Ms. Dipti Singh Arya and Mr. Sudhir Atri, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. R. Venkatramani, Attorney General with Mr. Vikram Jetly, CGSC, Ms. Shreya Jetly, Mr. Aakash Pathak (GP), Mr. Chitvan Singhal, Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Advocates for UOI alongwith Brig Sidharth Sen, SM, Lt Col Gaurav Chaudhary and Major Anish
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.