Ensure Public Amenities Do Not Suffer: Punjab & Haryana HC Scraps FCI Tender, Directs Issuance Of Fresh Notification Expeditiously

The Punjab & Haryana High Court scrapped the tender floated by the Food Corporation of India (FCI) with the direction to issue fresh notification so that public amenities do not suffer.

Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, "This Court is constrained to after accepting the writ petition, to pass a mandamus upon the respondent to scrap the subject tender, thus, for ensuring better competition for all concerned and also for receiving better bids."

The Court further said "Moreover, for also ensuring that a more transparent and well engaged deliberations are made by all concerned, that therebys a fresh tender becomes necessitated to be floated. Furthermore, the entire proceedings in respect thereof, be expeditiously concluded, so that public amenities, do not suffer."

The petition was filed challenging the rejection of his technical bid for a tender issued by the FCI. The petitioner's bid was rejected based on the non-submission of earnest money (EMD), despite claiming eligibility for an exemption under the Micro and Small Enterprises (MSE) category.

The petitioner sought quashing of the rejection order and directed the respondents to reconsider his bid.

The FCI argued that the Udyam Registration Certificate (URC) limited the petitioner's activity to trading for the purpose of Priority Sector Lending and did not classify him as a service provider eligible for EMD exemption.

After hearing the submissions, the court found that the URC explicitly allowed the petitioner to engage in micro and small enterprises which include providing services.

It further noted that the petitioner had previously been awarded similar contracts by the FCI on an ad-hoc basis, which demonstrated his qualification for the tender.

Stating that the rejection order of FCI is "completely flawed and arbitrary," the Court distinguished the present case from Apex Court's decision in M/s N.G. Projects Limited Vs. M/s Vinod Kumar Jain and others wherein it said that the Court should refrain from interfering in the grant of tender even if it suffers from total arbitrariness and malafides.

"That any contract of public service should not be interfered with lightly and in any case, there should not be any interim order derailing the entire process of the services meant for larger public good", the Supreme Court said.

Mr. Anurag Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sunish Bindlish, Advocate (Standing Counsel FCI)

Mr. Viney Kumar, Advocate

Ms. Ridhi Bansal, Advocate

Mr. Sagar Ratusaria, Advocate for respondent-FCI.

TITLE: Rahul Rajput v. Food Corporation of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 90

Click here to read/download the order