M/s.lnnovative lndustries v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, preferably a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the Tender Notifications (i)Tender No.NlT No.SE/TWlHYDl22l2025-26 dated 05.05.2025 (ii) Tender No. NIT No.SE/TWMGU35|2O25-26 dated 05.05.2025 (iii) Tender No.NlT No.SE/TWlWGU36l2025-26 dated 05.05.2025 (iv) Tender No.NlT No.SE/TWMGU37|2O25-26 dated 05.05.2025, issued by the third and fourth respondents imposing tailor made conditions as contained in Sl: Nos.2, 3, 4, 6,7, 9 and 10 of Pre-qualification Requirements as being irregular, illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of lndia by setting aside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay all further proceedings including finalization of Tender Notifications, namely (i) Tender No.NlT No.SE/TWlHYDl22l2025-26 dated 05.05.2025 (ii) Tender No. NtT No.SE/TWMGLl35l2025-26 dated 05.05.2025 (iii) Tender No.NlT No.SE/TWMGLl36l2O25-26 dated 05.05.2025 (iv) Tender No.NlT No.SE/TWMGL|3712025-26 dated 05.05.2025, issued by the third and fourth respondent, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.V VENUGOPAL SR COUNSEL REPRESENTING Ms. VANGA ANITA Counselfor the Respondents: GP FOR TRBIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT The Court made the following: ORDER THf HoN'BLE sR.r JUsrrcE NAGESH BHEEMArAT{A WRIT PETITION o.153O8 of 2025 ORDER: The present writ petition has been. filed und.er Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner seeking to set aside the tenders dated 05.05.2025 issued by respondent Nos.3 and 4.

2. Heard Sri P.V. Vbnugopal, learned Senior Counsel representing Ms. Vanga Anita, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Tribal Welfare Department, for the respondents.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a reputed firm engaged in the business of supplying Reverse Osmosis (RO) water purification systems and has been actively operating in the State of Telangana. Though the said tender notifications were dated 05.05.2025, the sarne were uploaded only on 07.O5.2O25 at9:00 P.M., thereby curtailing the effective bidding window. He submits that the eligibility and technical criteria stipulated in the said tender notifications are tailor-made to suit a specific undisclosed company, thereby excluding all other eligible participants, including the petitioner. Arbitrary conditions such as the requirement for prior supply of \ 2 2OO RO units of 5OO LPH or higher capacity, mandatory CE and RoHS certifications (which are applicable to European standards and not relevant in Indian context), waterquality test reports dated specifically after 01.O1.2025, and insistence on a specific make of electronic control panel ("WAVE") render the tender process discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constittrtion of India.

4. Leiuned Senior Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the fundamental procedural norms have not been follo'rved. No pre-bid meeting was conducted; no sample demonstration \{/as sought; no technical drawings were provided to guide the bidders. Several inconsistencies exist in key clauses including bid submission period, turnover requirements, solvency cril.eria, payment terms and contract period, all of which cumulativel5r result in an unfair, arbitrary, and restrictive tender process. The Petitioner made detailed representations on

14.O5.2O25 and 18.05.2025, which remain unaddressed. In view of the urgency, as the financial bids are likely to be opened and the technical bids were already opened only for ferv tenderers, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition seeking to set aside the I I I I : 3 said tender notifications.

5. Learned Government Pleader for the respondents filed counter affidavit stating that the Writ Petition is not maintainable as the Petitioner did not participate in the tender process and failed to implead the successful bidder, M/s. Sunwat Solutions Private Limited, whose bid was accepted and who has already completed the work. The said tenders were issued on 05.05.2025 for the installation of RO water plants across various Tribal Welfare Educational Institutions in the ITDA regions of Mannanur, Hyderabad, Utnoor, Eturunagararn, and Bhadrachalam, with a total project value of 123.43 crores. The bidding process was conducted online from O7.O5.2O25 to

15.05.2025, and the technical and commercial evaluations were completed as per procedure. Eight bidders participated in three works, and M/s Sunwat Solutions Private Limited was found technically qualified, while others, including M/s lnnovative Aqua Systems Private Limited, were disqualified. The Petitioner made representations only on 14.05.2025, just a day before bid closure, and again by post on 24.05.2025, after the bidding had closed and the work awarded. The Petitioner's claim of tailor- "l I I I I 4 made tender conditions is baseless, as all terms were approved by the Cornmissioner of Tribal Welfare and applicable uniformly. Furthermore, pre-bid meetings are not required in online tendering, and all relevant specifications were provided in the bid documents. It is submitted that the tenders were issued and processed strictly through the Government's e-procurement platform, rvith due compliance to procedure and timelines. The project',r,as time-bound, aimed at providing clean drinking water to tribal students before the schools reopened in June 2025, and the successful bidder has already completed the installations and submitted proof of work. Thus, the petitioner has no locus standi and the Writ- Petition is liable to be dismissed in limine.

6. The petitioner, in its reply, stated that the respondents awarded the tender work to M/s. Sunwat Solutions Private Limited even during the pendency of the present Writ Petition, displaying undue haste and favoritism. Despite raising specific concerns regarding the tailor-made tender conditions, the respondents failed to provide a meaningful counterargument in their Counter Affidavit. The Petitioner hightights that although the tenders 'were dated 05.05.2025, they were uploaded only on .\ j *.? 5

07.05.2025 at 9:00 PM, leaving a mere eight days for bid submission, which violates established procurement norms and government guidelines. The eligibility conditions such as high turnover, net worth, past government supply experience, and technical certifications were deliberately framed to exclude competitive participation and to benefit a specific bidder. Further, crucial tender aspects such as pre-bid meetings, demonstration of equipment, technical specifications, and payment terms were either omitted or vaguely defined. The Petitioner, despite being in the business and willing to participate, was effectively excluded and made representations on L4.05.2025 and 18.05.2025 seeking clarification, which were ignored. The speed at which work orders were issued on

31.05.2025 and installation certificates obtained the next day in distant locations clearly indicates that the tender process was pre-decided and manipulated in favour of M/s. Sunwat Solutions Private Limited. The Petitioner does not seek to claim the work but prays that the entire tender process be declared null and void due to procedural irregularities and arbitrary action by the respondents in violation of Articles L4 and 19(1Xg) of the ./ i i I ! i I t I I I t I I t' I I I i I 6 Constitution of India. Accordingly, the petitioner prays that the Writ Petition be allowed in the interest ofjustice' In the present case, it is undisputed that the petitioner

7. did not peu'ticipate in the tender, nor did it file a bid. Mere submission of a representation to the respondents authority, without following the bidding process, does not confer any lega1 right to challenge the tender. Further, the successful bidder i.e. M/s. Sunwa,t Solutions Private Limited has not been impleaded, and any adjudication in its absence would be contrary to the principles of natural justice. On merits, this Court finds that the respondents acted within its policy domain and administrati've discretion to set technical qualifications and tender requirements. The conditions set out in the tenders do not appear to be arbitrary or irrational. Mere stringency of tender conditions, by itself, does not render them unconstitutional unless shown to be manifestly arbitrary or d.iscriminatory. The petitioner hzrs failed to establish with cogent material that the tender process was vitiated by ma.la fides or that there was any violation of constitutional or legal mandates in the issuance and award of the tender. It is well settled that courts do not interfere r\ \ I / i I I I l i, l I i I 7 in administrative or contractual matters relating to tenders unless there is clear evidence of mala fide or arbitrariness. No such evidence is produced in the present case. B. In light of the above, this court is not inclined to entertain the writ Petition. The petitioner has neither the locus standi to maintain the petition nor has made out any grounds warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

9. to costs. closed The rvrit petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand SD/- L. VIJAYA ASSISTANT REGI LN(MI //TRUE COPY/ SECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to Ms. VANGA ANITA Advocate [OPUCI 2.TwoCCstoGPFoRTR|BALWELFARE,HighCourtfortheStateof Telangana. [OUTI

3. Two CD CoPies KKS \qr HIGH COURT DATED:1 8/08/2025 ORDER WP.No.15308 ot 2025 ...r:i: l't-' 0 3 Etl 2q5 (' )' '. t * i'-ll-;\'J 'l ') -.\--::-_: DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (, ""6at %G\a5