Tender eligibility criteria are generally not interfered with in writ review absent arbitrariness, mala fides, discrimination, or illegality.

Tender eligibility conditions are treated as matters of contract and administrative policy, and judicial review under Article 226 is confined to cases of arbitrariness, discrimination, mala fides, bias, or other illegality. The court noted that the eligibility criteria were revised by the competent authority to secure quality supply and wider participation, and the increased turnover requirement was not shown to be exclusionary or arbitrary. The corrigendum was also found to be within the procurement framework, including the power to modify tender terms and the requirement of recorded reasons where time is reduced. The challenge to the tender conditions therefore failed, and no interference with the notification or modified criteria was warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the tender eligibility criteria and corrigendum could be interfered with in writ jurisdiction on the grounds of arbitrariness, discrimination, mala fides, and alleged violation of the Transparency Rules.

Analysis: The governing principle applied was that tender conditions fall within the realm of contract and administrative policy, and judicial review under Article 226 is confined to cases of arbitrariness, discrimination, mala fides, or bias. The eligibility criteria were found to have been fixed after review by the competent authority for ensuring quality supply and wider participation, and the increase in turnover requirement was not shown to be arbitrary or designed to exclude the petitioner. The corrigendum only modified one aspect of the eligibility condition and the record showed compliance with the relevant procurement rules, including the authority to modify tender terms and the requirement that any reduction in time be specifically authorised for recorded reasons. The petitioner's grievance was therefore held to be insufficient to warrant judicial interference.

Conclusion: The challenge to the tender conditions failed, and no interference with the notification or its modified eligibility criteria was called for.

Ratio Decidendi: Courts do not rewrite tender eligibility conditions in the absence of arbitrariness, discrimination, mala fides, or other illegality, and great latitude is afforded to the State in framing procurement terms in public interest.

---