Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Case Number | C.A. No.-013111-013111 – 2025 |
| Diary Number | 29555/2021 |
| Judge Name | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT |
| Bench | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT; HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI |
| Precedent Value | Binding |
| Overrules / Affirms | Overrules technical-bid rejection that was dehors the NIT terms |
| Type of Law | Administrative / Tender |
| Questions of Law | Whether Clause 18 of the NIT required a ‘haisiyat praman patra’ to be issued only by a District Magistrate and if rejection of a professional valuer’s certificate is valid when not so specified |
| Ratio Decidendi | The NIT’s terms must be clear and unambiguous. Since Clause 18 did not expressly mandate a District Magistrate’s issuance, the Mandi Parishad erred in disqualifying the bid based solely on issuer. Additional grounds cannot be belatedly invoked. |
| Judgments Relied Upon |
|
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon |
|
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Tender floated by Mandi Parishad for a 10-year lease of banquet hall; two-stage bidding; Clause 18 required a ₹10 crore ‘haisiyat praman patra’; appellant’s submission by private valuer rejected for not being from a District Magistrate |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and tender-inviting authorities |
| Persuasive For | High Courts in administrative and tender disputes |
| Overrules | Disqualification of technical bids on non-specified NIT grounds |
| Follows |
|
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Tender conditions must expressly state the authority required to issue solvency certificates; silence cannot be filled by administrative notifications.
- Decision confirms that rejecting bids on grounds not specified in the NIT is beyond the scope of tender terms and subject to quashing.
- Parties cannot introduce fresh objections in pleadings to justify an earlier decision of bid rejection.
- Professional valuers empanelled with government departments can satisfy solvency requirements if the NIT does not prescribe a specific issuing authority.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- Examination of Clause 18 and NIT
Found no express requirement that the ‘haisiyat praman patra’ be issued by a District Magistrate as per the UP government notification. - Principle of Clear and Unambiguous Terms
Reiterated that tender conditions must be explicit; ambiguity cannot be resolved against the bidder. - Scope of Judicial Review in Tender Matters
Judicial interference is limited to cases where the authority acts dehors its own terms or in a patently arbitrary manner. - Invalidity of Post-Hoc Grounds
Held that additional objections raised belatedly in pleadings cannot sustain a prior rejection order. - Remand for Reconsideration
Directed the Mandi Parishad to reassess the technical bid on the basis of net-worth requirement alone and allow necessary negotiations.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
NIT did not specify that only a District Magistrate could issue the ‘haisiyat praman patra’. Certificate by an empanelled Income Tax Department valuer showed net worth far exceeding ₹10 crores. No lawful basis existed to reject a professionally issued valuation certificate.
Respondent
Clause 18 implicitly required a District Magistrate’s certificate under the UP government notification (29.10.2018). Valuation certificate failed to disclose potential encumbrances, thus not reflecting true net worth.
Factual Background
A two-stage tender was floated by Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad to lease a banquet hall/terrace lawn for ten years. The NIT’s Clause 18 mandated submission of a ‘haisiyat praman patra’ evidencing a minimum solvency of ₹10 crores. The appellant’s technical bid, supported by a valuation certificate from a private architect–valuer, was disqualified for not being issued by a District Magistrate. The Allahabad High Court upheld that rejection, and the matter reached this Court on special leave.
Statutory Analysis
- Government Notification No. C.M.-648/One-9-2018-7(M)/18 (29.10.2018) prescribes procedure for District Magistrate to issue solvency certificates.
- The tendering body is constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964, and the notification does not per se apply unless incorporated into the NIT.
- No other statutory or constitutional provisions were invoked to alter the interpretation of the tender conditions.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed