Chhattisgarh HC quashes arbitrary blacklisting clauses in CGMSCL tenders, upholds fair bidding rights

RAIPUR: The High Court has quashed certain clauses related to blacklisting in the tender documents issued by the Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Limited (CGMSCL). These clauses, part of tender No.194/CGMSCL/108 Sanjeevani Express/2025-26 and tender No. 196/CGMSCL/Haat Bazar/2025-26, stipulated that any bidder blacklisted at any point in the past would be debarred from participating in the tender process, even if the blacklisting period had ended.Hearing petitions, a division bench comprising Chief Ramesh Sinha and Justice Arvind Kumar Verma observed that while the tendering authority has the right to set conditions, these conditions cannot be arbitrary. The court noted that the challenged clauses appeared unreasonable as they permanently barred previously blacklisted entities, denying them a chance to participate even after the penalty period. The requirement in the annexures for bidders to declare they were never blacklisted was also deemed unjustified.The High Court referred to a recent Supreme Court ruling in Banshidhar Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. & Others, which reiterated that while courts do not act as appellate authorities in contract awards, the decision-making process must be fair, transparent, and free from arbitrariness.The bench clarified that if a bidder had been blacklisted earlier and the blacklisting period has concluded, they would be eligible to participate in the tender process, provided they meet other stipulated conditions. However, bidders currently under blacklisting will remain ineligible.The court disposed of the petitions with the aforementioned observations and directions and noted that tendering authority can set necessary conditions, but they should not be arbitrary or impractical, hindering the participation of potential bidders.The petitioner, a healthcare infrastructure and service provider, had approached the High Court challenging several clauses in two Request for Proposals (RFPs) issued by the CGMSCL.The petitioner had sought the court's intervention to declare various eligibility conditions outlined in clauses of the RFP dated 9 April 2025 as arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminatory, and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner had also challenged the amendments made to several Clauses through a corrigendum issued on 6 May 2025, contending they suffer from the same infirmities.The petitioner had further prayed for the quashing of the entire RFP, arguing that the technical evaluation criteria specified in the a Clause are arbitrary, vague, and against the principles of fair and transparent competition in public procurement. The petitioner had requested the HC to direct the respondents to reissue a fresh RFP with fair and reasonable eligibility and evaluation criteria for the operation, maintenance, and management of the 108 Sanjeevani Express Emergency Ambulance Services.The petitioner had specifically contested the technical experience requirement and the evaluation criteria, which mandate prior experience in technology-based screening for limited disease areas. The petitioner argued that these criteria are arbitrary, irrational, and lack a rational connection with the field-based healthcare services envisioned under the tender. The petitioner has also sought the quashing of the RFP and a direction for the issuance of a fresh tender with equitable and transparent criteria for the Mobile Medical Units project.The petitioner stated that it is a body corporate involved in providing comprehensive healthcare infrastructure and services across India, including hospital operations and emergency medical services.