Enviro Infra Engineers Limited vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Facts

The petitioner, Enviro Infra Engineers Limited, filed a writ petition challenging the rejection of its bid for a tender floated by the Municipal Corporation Durg. The tender, NIT No. 1262, was for construction, testing, commissioning, and operation and maintenance of water and waste water treatment projects. The petitioner submitted its bid online on July 17, 2025, and physically on July 18, 2025. The bid was rejected on July 21, 2025, with the reason cited as "GST Return Not Submitted." The petitioner contended that the NIT clause requiring a "valid GST Return certificate" was vague and that it had submitted returns for the preceding financial year, which is standard practice. The petitioner also argued that it was not given an opportunity of hearing before rejection, violating principles of natural justice and Article 14 of the Constitution.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner's bid was rejected due to non-submission of the GST return certificate, as required by Clause 1.1-16a-vii of the tender document. The Court found that the documents provided by the petitioner did not meet the specified format or requirements, and this deficiency was duly recorded by the evaluation committee. The Court noted that the evaluation of the bid was conducted in a fair and transparent manner, following due process as enumerated in the NIT, and the petitioner failed to establish any favoritism or arbitrary decisions. Applying the established legal principle that courts do not sit as appellate authorities in tender matters, and considering that the L-1 bidder had already been declared, the Court found no merit in the petition. The Court cited various Supreme Court judgments emphasizing judicial restraint in interfering with administrative actions in tender matters unless the process is mala fide, irrational, or affects public interest. The Court concluded that the petitioner was not entitled to any relief.

Key Issues

1. Whether the rejection of the petitioner's bid for non-submission of a GST return certificate, based on a vague clause in the Notice Inviting Tender (NIT), is arbitrary and violates Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India? The petitioner argued that Clause 1.1 sub-clause 16(a)(vii) of the NIT was vague, not specifying the period or type of GST return required, and that submitting returns for the preceding financial year was standard practice. They contended that rejection on such vague grounds, without clarification, arbitrarily restricted their right to do business. The revenue argued that the petitioner failed to meet the specified requirements of the tender document, and the authorities rightly declined to entertain the bid. 2. Whether the rejection of the petitioner's bid without providing an opportunity of hearing violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India and standard tendering procedures? The petitioner argued that the lack of a hearing and the alleged pick-and-choose policy adopted by the respondents demonstrated arbitrariness, irrationality, mala fide, and bias. The revenue contended that the tender process was completed following due process, and the petitioner was ineligible as per the requisite criteria.