Topic

Tender Disputes

3 articlesLatest July 2026
Flexible Proof of Supply Quantity in Tender Qualification | Karnataka HC Relaxes MT Requirement Under Writ Jurisdiction : Karnataka HC
Case Law Analysis
|Karnataka High Court

Flexible Proof of Supply Quantity in Tender Qualification | Karnataka HC Relaxes MT Requirement Under Writ Jurisdiction : Karnataka HC

Karnataka High Court rules that bidders can prove supply quantity in tenders using work orders and satisfaction certificates, rejecting rigid metric tonne (MT) requirements. This judgment eases compliance for contractors in government procurement, setting a precedent for flexible qualification criteria under administrative law.

Article 226 | Non-Participant in Tender Process Lacks Locus Standi to Challenge Conditions: Andhra Pradesh HC
Case Law Analysis
|Andhra Pradesh High Court

Article 226 | Non-Participant in Tender Process Lacks Locus Standi to Challenge Conditions: Andhra Pradesh HC

The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that a non-participant in a tender process cannot challenge its conditions under Article 226, especially when the petition is filed after a 7-year delay, rendering it barred by laches. This reinforces the principle that locus standi in tender disputes is restricted to actual participants, limiting judicial review of public procurement decisions.

Article 14 & Tender Law | Arbitrary ₹60 Crore Qualification Cap Violates Equality; Karnataka HC Secures ₹29 Crore Reduction : Karnataka HC
Case Law Analysis
|Karnataka High Court

Article 14 & Tender Law | Arbitrary ₹60 Crore Qualification Cap Violates Equality; Karnataka HC Secures ₹29 Crore Reduction : Karnataka HC

Karnataka High Court ruled that an unreasonably high tender qualification threshold (₹60 crore) violates Article 14 by excluding capable bidders. The state's subsequent reduction to ₹29 crore sets a precedent for proportionality in public procurement, ensuring fair competition and constitutional compliance.