Rajesh Praful Chordiya vs. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Another

Held

The Court held that the GST clearance certificate uploaded by the petitioner, issued by his Chartered Accountant, was not a valid substitute for a certificate issued by the GST Department. The Court reasoned that the tender document, by requiring a GST clearance certificate by a certain date, implicitly meant a certificate from the concerned department, especially given the nature of the tender involving mandatory GST payments. The Court distinguished the case of Kimberley Club Private Limited, stating that a Haisiyat Pramanpatra (financial ability certificate) could be issued by various entities, whereas a GST clearance certificate pertains to mandatory government payments and thus requires departmental issuance. The Court also noted that the petitioner possessed a valid GST clearance certificate from the appropriate officer dated 17.10.2025 but failed to upload it, instead opting for the Chartered Accountant's certificate. The Court found no merit in the petitioner's submission that he should have been given more time to rectify the documents, as the issue was with a substantial term of the tender. The petition was dismissed.

Facts

The petitioner, Rajesh Praful Chordia, filed a writ petition challenging the rejection of his technical bid for a tender to provide pendol, furniture, and ancillary articles for upcoming Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samiti Elections in 2025. The tender document required a GST clearance certificate by the end of March 2025. The petitioner uploaded a certificate signed by his Chartered Accountant. The District Collector rejected his technical bid on the grounds that the GST clearance certificate was not annexed. The petitioner argued that the certificate uploaded was sufficient and that similar certificates were accepted elsewhere. He also contended that he was not given adequate opportunity for a hearing. The tender was ultimately awarded to 'Rajesh Tent House'. The petitioner later obtained a GST clearance certificate from the appropriate officer dated 17.10.2025, after his bid documents were uploaded on 15.10.2025.

Key Issues

1. Whether the GST clearance certificate uploaded by the petitioner, issued by his Chartered Accountant, was a valid substitute for a certificate issued by the GST Department, as required by the tender document? The petitioner argued that the tender document did not specify that the GST clearance certificate must be issued by the GST Department, only that it be a GST clearance certificate. He relied on the Supreme Court decision in Kimberley Club Private Limited vs. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad and others, where a certificate not issued by a specified authority was not rejected. The revenue contended that the tender document implicitly required a certificate from the concerned department, especially for a tender involving mandatory GST payments and on behalf of the Election Commission. They argued that the Chartered Accountant's certificate was based on returns and did not confirm personal knowledge of tax payments.