Tender : Unsuccessful bidders must raise objections to tender conditions at the first instance.
Allahabad High Court Dismisses Writ Petition on Tender Process Challenge. Unsuccessful bidders barred from challenging tender conditions post participation, rules the court.
In a significant judgment delivered by the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), the court has dismissed a writ petition filed by Avani Paridhi Energy and Communications Pvt. Ltd., which challenged the technical evaluation and overall tender process conducted by the State of Uttar Pradesh. The decision, dated October 6, 2025, was delivered by a division bench comprising Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Prashant Kumar.
The petitioner, Avani Paridhi Energy and Communications Pvt. Ltd., sought judicial intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, alleging that the tender process was not in alignment with a specific Government Order dated May 19, 2023. However, the bench, relying on established legal principles concerning judicial review in tender matters, upheld that courts should ordinarily refrain from interfering in tender processes unless there is evidence of gross, palpable, or arbitrary actions.
The court emphasized that mere procedural deviations or perceived prejudice do not warrant judicial interference, and public interest along with commercial prudence must take precedence. It was noted that a bidder who participates in a tender and is unsuccessful cannot subsequently challenge the tender conditions unless objections were raised at the earliest opportunity.
The counsel for the respondent, representing the State of Uttar Pradesh, argued that the petitioner, having participated in the tender process, was barred from challenging it through a writ petition. This argument was supported by a Supreme Court precedent in the case of Tata Motors Limited v. Brihan Mumbai Electric Supply & Transport Undertaking (Best), which the bench found persuasive.
The petitioner's counsel attempted to draw parallels with a previous judgment from the Uttarakhand High Court, where it was held that a tender submitted under protest does not estop the bidder from filing a writ petition. However, the Allahabad High Court found that the petitioner failed to substantiate their protest with credible evidence, such as proof of receipt of their protest letter, thus weakening their case.
The ruling further reiterated the principle that judicial review in tender matters should be restrained, particularly in commercial contexts, and courts must avoid substituting their decisions for those of the employer unless overwhelming public interest necessitates intervention. The judgment highlighted the importance of maintaining public interest and avoiding unnecessary financial burdens on the public exchequer.
In conclusion, the court dismissed the writ petition, reinforcing the notion that unsuccessful bidders cannot use judicial review as a tool to challenge tender conditions post participation, without having raised timely objections initially.
Bottom Line:
Judicial review in tender matters - A person who participates in a tender process and is unsuccessful cannot later challenge the tender process or conditions unless something gross or palpable is shown. Unsuccessful bidders must raise objections to tender conditions at the first instance.
Statutory provision(s): Article 226 of the Constitution of India
