Tender bid non-responsiveness upheld where mandatory clearance certificate and product declaration did not match bid conditions.

A bidder who fails to satisfy mandatory tender qualifications and product declarations may be treated as non-responsive, and the disqualification will generally stand in judicial review. The court noted that the required clearance certificate had to show the quantity of empty printing paper cleared under Tariff Code 4802 for the relevant financial year, but the certificate submitted referred only to paper under Chapter 48 generally. The bid also lacked the required declaration that the paper offered was S.S. surface sized Maplitho Printing Paper, and the sample omitted that specification. On these facts, the bid did not conform to the tender conditions, and the rejection as technically disqualified was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner's bid was rightly treated as non-responsive and technically disqualified in the tender process.

Analysis: The bid documents required a clearance certificate showing the quantity of empty printing paper cleared under Tariff Code 4802 for the relevant financial year. The certificate submitted by the petitioner referred only to paper under Chapter 48 generally and did not certify the requisite quantity under Tariff Code 4802. The tender also required a declaration that the paper offered was S.S. surface sized Maplitho Printing Paper, but the declaration and sample omitted that specification. On these facts, the bid did not conform to the tender conditions and the decision to treat it as non-responsive could not be faulted. The broader challenge to the tender specification itself was not before the Court.

Conclusion: The petitioner's bid was validly declared technically disqualified, and the challenge to that decision failed.

Final Conclusion: The petition was dismissed as the rejection of the bid was upheld on the ground of non-responsiveness to the tender requirements.

Ratio Decidendi: A bidder who does not satisfy mandatory tender qualifications and declarations prescribed in the bid conditions can validly be treated as non-responsive, and such disqualification will not be interfered with in judicial review absent challenge to the underlying tender terms.

---