Allowed

N.Ravichandran v. The Principal Government Secretary

Madras HC8 Jul 2025WP(MD)/17993/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Four writ petitions challenged rejection of a bidder's tender at technical evaluation and delayed opening of technical bids. The court found no valid reason for rejection and held that opening the bid on 30.06.2025 instead of the scheduled date contravened Rule 21(2) of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Rules, 2000, quashed the tender summary reports and permitted a fresh tender.

What did the court decide?

Impugned Tender Summary Reports dated 30.06.2025 quashed; liberty to float fresh tender in accordance with law; no costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

N.Ravichandran Vs The Principal Government… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD) Nos.17993 to 17996 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 08.07.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN

¶6

W.P.(MD) Nos.17993 to 17996 of 2025 and

¶7

W.M.P.(MD) Nos.13767, 13769, 13770, 13772, 13773, 13774, 13777 & 13778 of 2025

¶8

N.Ravichandran

¶9

... Petitioner in all W.Ps.

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1.The Principal Government Secretary, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department,

¶12

Chennai – 09.

¶13

2.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration/ Water Supply Department, No.75, Urban Administrative Building, Santhome High Road, MRC Nagar, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 28.

¶14

3.The Commissioner, Kadayanallur Municipality, Tenkasi District.

¶15

... Respondents in all W.Ps.

¶16

COMMON PRAYER : Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned Tender Summary Reports

¶17

Page No. 1 of 9

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

W.P.(MD) Nos.17993 to 17996 of 2025

¶20

all dated 30.06.2025 bearing Tender ID 2025_MAWS_570318_3, Tender ID 2025_MAWS_570318_4, Tender ID 2025_MAWS_570318_2 & Tender ID 2025_MAWS_570318_1 respectively issued by the third respondent, quashing the same and consequently accepting the petitioner's bids for the Tender in 474/2025/E1.

¶21

For Petitioner in all W.Ps. : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai for M/s.Vanitha

¶22

For R1 & R2 in all W.Ps. : Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman Government Advocate For R3 in all W.Ps. : Mr.M.Rajarajan

¶23

¶24

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶25

By this common order, these four Writ Petitions are being disposed

¶26

of.

¶27

In these Writ Petitions, the petitioner has challenged the

¶28

respective communications in the form of Tender Summary Reports, all dated 30.06.2025, rejecting the petitioner's bid during the technical evaluation stage. Details of the impugned Tender Summary Reports are given below:

¶29

Page No. 2 of 9

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

W.P.(MD) Nos.17993 to 17996 of 2025

¶32

*Sl.* *No.*	*W.P.(MD)* *No.*	*Tender ID No.*	*Bid Number*	*Status*
		*Tender Ref N*	*o.474/2025/E1*
1	17993 of 2025	2025_MAWS_3	1381444	Not Admitted - Fee/PreQual/Technical
2	17994 of 2025	2025_MAWS_4	1381442	Not Admitted - Fee/PreQual/Technical
3	17995 of 2025	2025_MAWS_2	1381445	Not Admitted - Fee/PreQual/Technical
4	17993 of 2025	2025_MAWS_1	1381446	Not Admitted - Fee/PreQual/Technical

¶33

The reasons stated in the impugned Tender Summary Reports are identical. For the sake of clarity, the reasons for rejecting the petitioner's bid submitted on 26.06.2025, in respect of Tender ID 2025_MAWS-570318_3 impugned in W.P.(MD) No.17993 of 2025, are reproduced below:

¶34

Others-Reason For Ineligibility : N.Ravichandran Bidder not Attached Sl no 12 Annexure A to E,SL.NO 7,SL NO 13 Documents are Property not Signed Individually in all pages.

¶35

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

¶36

has demonstrated that none of the conditions stipulated in the Tender Summary Reports, rejecting the petitioner's bids during the technical

¶37

Page No. 3 of 9

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

W.P.(MD) Nos.17993 to 17996 of 2025

¶40

evaluation, is correct. He has substantiated this by relying on the tender documents that were uploaded by the petitioner and downloaded for the purpose of these Writ Petitions.

¶41

It is submitted that though the last date for opening the tender was 27.06.2025, the bid was opened only on 30.06.2025. It is further submitted that the aforesaid procedure followed is in direct conflict with the statutory regulations under Rule 21(2) of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Rules, 2000.

¶42

This Court, at the time of admission of these Writ Petitions on

¶43

01.07.2025, has ordered as follows:

¶44

Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman, Government Advocatetakes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2. Mr.M.Rajarajan, learned Standing Counsel takes notice on behalf of the third respondent.

¶45

2. Prima facie, it appears that opening of the tender on 30.06.2025, at about 16.02.40 hours is contrary to the stipulations in the tender documents, wherein the bid for opening the tender has been specified as 27.06.2025 at 3.30 p.m. It appears to be a clear violation of Rule 21 of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tender Rules, 2000.

¶46

3. Under these circumstances, the respondents are directed to refrain from opening the bid till 08.07.2025.

¶47

____________ Page No. 4 of 9_

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶49

W.P.(MD) Nos.17993 to 17996 of 2025

¶50

4. For filing counter and for further orders, the case is adjourned to 08.07.2025, immediately after admission.

¶51

Thereafter, the case was posted today. The learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent was asked to get instructions, pursuant to which today he has produced a copy of the communication dated 07.07.2025, bearing reference Na.Ka.No.474/2025/E1, issued by the third respondent, wherein it has been stated that the bid was not opened on the date mentioned in the schedule prescribed in the tender document on account of administrative reasons. The relevant portion of the said communication dated 07.07.2025 reads as under:

¶52

Nkw;gb gzpf;F ngwg;gl;l xg;ge;jjg;Gs;spfs; epHthf eyd; fUjp 27.06.2025 md;W jpwf;fg;gltpy;iy. NkYk; tug;ngw;w xg;ge;jg;Gs;spfspd; njhopy;El;g ciwfs; (Technical Bid) 30.06.2025 md;W jpwf;fg;gl;L eltbf;ifapy; cs;sJ vd;w tpguj;jpid ,jd; %yk; md;Gld; njuptpj;Jf;nfhs;fpNwd;.

¶53

A reading of the aforesaid communication indicates that the

¶54

respondents have cited administrative reasons for the delay in opening the tender.

¶55

Page No. 5 of 9

¶56

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶57

W.P.(MD) Nos.17993 to 17996 of 2025

¶58

The learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent further

¶59

submits that the petitioner has an alternate remedy by way of an appeal under Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998, and therefore, these Writ Petitions are liable to be dismissed, and the respondents may be permitted to declare the results and award the contract to the successful bidder.

¶60

By way of rejoinder, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only three persons participated in the tender floated by the respondents. It is submitted that, barring the petitioner, the other two participants are close relatives, one of whom is proposed to be declared as the successful bidder if these Writ Petitions are to be dismissed.

¶61

Having considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the first and second respondents, and the learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent, and having perused the contents of the communication dated 07.07.2025 bearing reference Na.Ka.No. 474/2025/E1 issued by the third respondent, Rule 21(2) of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Rules, 2000, and the documents filed by the

¶62

____________ Page No. 6 of 9_

¶63

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶64

W.P.(MD) Nos.17993 to 17996 of 2025

¶65

petitioner, it is evident that none of the reasons stated in the impugned Tender Summary Reports or in the communication dated 07.07.2025 is valid.

¶66

The petitioner appears to have complied with all the requirements and enclosed all the necessary documents. Furthermore, the opening of the bid on 30.06.2025 is clearly contrary to Rule 21(2) of the aforesaid Rules, which stipulates that the time specified for the opening of tenders shall be immediately after the closing time specified for the receipt of tenders, allowing a reasonable period not exceeding one hour for the transportation of the tenders received to the place where they are to be opened, in the presence of the tenderers who choose to be present.

¶67

The aforesaid requirement appears to have not been followed by rejecting the petitioner's bids. Under these circumstances, the impugned Tender Summary Reports all dated 30.06.2025 challenged in these Writ Petitions are quashed.

¶68

Since the time has lapsed, liberty is given to the respondents to float a fresh tender in accordance with law. It is made clear that the

¶69

Page No. 7 of 9

¶70

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶71

W.P.(MD) Nos.17993 to 17996 of 2025

¶72

respondents shall ensure that the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 and the Rules made thereunder are strictly followed, and that no arbitrariness is exercised with a view to oust the petitioner's bid.

¶73

Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are allowed. No costs.

¶74

Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶75

08.07.2025

¶76

JEN

¶77

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes/No

¶78

¶79

1.The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Chennai – 09.

¶80

2.The Commissioner, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, No.75, Urban Administrative Building, Santhome High Road, MRC Nagar, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 28.

¶81