3 min readRaipurApr 10, 2026 07:10 AM IST
The Chhattisgarh High Court Thursday ruled in favour of a women’s Self-Help Group (SHG), quashing a Rs 60-lakh tender floated by a government hospital in Jashpur district for food services for a year.
“This court has no hesitation in holding that the impugned action of the respondents is arbitrary, violative of Article 14 (Right to Equality) of the Constitution of India,” the court said.
The petitioner is a women’s Self-Help Group managing a restaurant, ‘Gad Kalewa’, at Jungle Bazar, Jashpur. It is a registered Micro or Small Enterprise (MSE).
The petition states that on February 19, the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Hospital Superintendent, District Hospital, Jashpur, floated a tender on the GeM portal for providing food for a year, with a deposit of Rs 60,000. The eligibility conditions required bidders to have a minimum average annual turnover of Rs 50 lakh for the last three years.
“However, the bid document itself expressly and unequivocally provides that if the bidder is MSE as per the latest orders issued by the Ministry of MSME, the bidder shall be granted complete relaxation from the eligibility criteria relating to both ‘experience criteria’ and ‘bidder turnover’, subject to meeting the quality and technical specifications,” it said.
On March 30, the petitioner’s tender was rejected, stating it did not fulfil the turnover criteria. In the petition, the SHG argued that the turnover requirement was higher than that in another district, which was Rs 15 lakh.
“In a similar tender floated for dietary services at District Hospital, Balod, the minimum average annual turnover requirement was fixed at only Rs 15,00,000, whereas in the present tender it has been arbitrarily enhanced to Rs 50,00,000 without any rational basis. Such inconsistency clearly reflects non-application of mind and renders the condition manifestly arbitrary,” the petition said.
Story continues below this ad
Demonstrating a pattern of arbitrary conduct by the respondents, counsel argued that the petitioner had “previously been awarded a similar contract for the term 2024–2025, which was abruptly cancelled without issuance of any notice or affording an opportunity of hearing, and the same was set aside by this Hon’ble Court”.
Opposing the petition, the state submitted that the tender process was conducted strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions of the bid document and applicable statutory provisions and procurement rules.
After hearing both sides, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Ravindra Kumar Agrawal quashed the tender. “In matters of public procurement, the State and its instrumentalities are required to adhere strictly to the terms of the tender and to act in a manner that is fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory. Any deviation therefrom, particularly one that results in prejudice to a bidder, cannot be sustained in law,” the court said, adding that the action was “arbitrary, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, and unsustainable in law”, and that the tender process “stands vitiated on account of such illegality”.
