Bidder Can Never Dictate Employer Or Govt Authority With Regard To Fixation Of Tender Conditions Or Parameters: Andhra Pradesh High Court
While dismissing a Petition challenging a Tender Notification issued by the Government Textbooks Press, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has observed that a bidder can never dictate the employer or the Government Authority with regard to the fixation of tender conditions or the parameters.
The Writ Petitions before the High Court were filed by the Printers and Suppliers of Textbooks to various State Governments.
The Single Bench of Justice Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad said, “One idiomatic expression states that “Monkeys cannot decide the affairs of the forest‟ likewise, a bidder can never dictate the employer or the Government Authority with regard to the fixation of tender conditions or the parameters.”
Advocate Tagore Yadav Yaragorla represented the Petitioner while GP represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The first Petitioner, through the second Petitioner, had been printing and supplying the Textbooks to the Department of Education for the supply of Textbooks to the schools in the state. The Director, Andhra Pradesh Government Textbooks Press (Respondent 3) had issued a Tender Notification calling for “Expression of Interest (EoI)” for Empanelment of Printers/Publishers/Book Distributors of Andhra Pradesh for printing and distribution of school textbooks/workbooks (with paper) for sale component to the students studying in private schools for the Academic Years 2025-2026 & 2026-2027.
The notable tender conditions included Clause 5 in Section I dealing with the “Scope of Work”. Clauses 8 and 9 of Section-II of the Tender Notification dealt with the supply of sample copies at the earliest point of time so that the textbooks should be made available, and also with regard to “Annual Turnover”. Two corrigenda were issued in the year 2025, amending Clauses 9 and 14.
Arguments
It was the case of the writ petitioners that the tender conditions as laid down by the Government of Andhra Pradesh during the yesteryears had fixed a minimum turnover of five crores during the last three financial years. Whereas, Clause-9 of the Section-II Tender Notification had doubled the minimum turnover and made it as ten crores for the last three financial years i.e., 2022-2023, 2023-2024 and 2024- 2025.
Reasoning
The Bench was of the view that although the Writ Petitioners had placed heavy reliance on the Tender conditions in various Tender Notifications of the State of Telangana as well as the State of Andhra Pradesh, particularly with regard to the academic years 2023-2024, 2024-2025, however, reference to such Tender conditions had no relevance since every individual Authority has always right to either prescribe or to modify the Tender conditions ‘at will’.
The Bench also made it clear that no benefit could be attached to the Writ Petitioners in informing the Government with regard to the reduction of price of paper. “Even with regard to the offer made by the Writ Petitioners through their Letter dated 05.02.2025 (Ex.P.2), by which the Writ Petitioners had acted like a whistle-blower to the Government informing the Government that the price of the paper has significantly reduced from Rs.150/- per Kg to Rs.80/- per Kg with a request to the Government to factor in this reduction in price in the Tender document which is likely to be issued in the near future, the said intimation may not enure to the benefit of the Writ Petitioners. It can always be reasonably assumed that the Government and its Authorities are also keeping themselves abreast of the changes in the market price with regard to the cost of paper from time to time”, it added.
The Bench was of the view that the increase of the threshold with regard to the turnover from five crores per annum to ten crores per annum was neither unreasonable nor arbitrary. The Court was also of the opinion that giving latitude to the bidders to show the minimum turnover of ten crores for two years period during the last five financial years was also not arbitrary.
On a perusal of the facts of the case, the Bench noted that out of the 13 bidders, 8 bidders had reached the threshold of turnover of ten crores. Therefore, it couldn’t be said that fixation of the 10 crores threshold was arbitrary, nor was it discriminative in any manner, because out of the 13 bidders, 8 bidders were qualified in the technical bid. Moreover, about 12 bidders got qualified even without the Corrigendum. As per the Bench, it couldn’t be said that the Corrigendum that was issued within three days of the earlier Tender Notification was bad in law.
Thus, finding no merit in the Petition, the Bench dismissed the same.
Cause Title: Vikram Book Links Private Limited v. The State of AP (Case No.: Writ Petition No: 5435 of 2025)
Appearance
Petitioner: Advocate Tagore Yadav Yaragorla
Respondent: GP
