Mandatory Tender Conditions Cannot Be Relaxed After Bid Submission: Punjab and Haryana HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court, in Kannect Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors. (CWP No. 8897 of 2026), decided on July 7, 2026, held that a procuring authority cannot permit a successful bidder to furnish essential technical documents after the last date for submission of bids where the tender conditions require such documents to accompany the bid. The Hon’ble High Court reiterated that while judicial review in tender matters is limited, constitutional courts may interfere where the decision-making process is arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to the mandatory terms of the tender.

The dispute arose from a tender floated by Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (“PSPCL”) for the supply and installation of 1,000 power quality meters. The petitioner challenged the award of the contract to the successful bidder on the grounds that it had failed to upload the mandatory type test reports demonstrating compliance with the prescribed technical standards along with its bid. Although the purchase order had already been issued, the successful bidder furnished several of the required test reports only thereafter.

The petitioner contended that the tender conditions unequivocally required the mandatory test reports to be submitted before the bid deadline and that permitting the successful bidder to furnish them subsequently amounted to an impermissible relaxation of an essential eligibility condition. PSPCL, on the other hand, argued that the bidder substantially complied with the tender requirements and that the authority was justified in seeking the requisite documents during the evaluation process.

The Hon’ble High Court observed that the mandatory test reports were intended to establish that the equipment satisfied the prescribed technical specifications before the bids were considered. It found that PSPCL had issued the purchase order despite the absence of several essential test reports, including the EMC Immunity test reports, which were submitted only after the award of the contract, while the reports pertaining to the shock, vibration and damp heat cyclic tests remained outstanding even as on the date of the judgment. The Hon’ble High Court held that such an approach defeated the very purpose of the tender conditions and amounted to a clear departure from the mandatory provisions of the Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) and the applicable corrigendum. It further observed that accepting fresh technical documents after the bid submission deadline was not a case of curing minor deficiencies but of permitting compliance with an essential eligibility requirement at a later stage.

Reiterating the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Tata Cellular v. Union of India, Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. v. Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Silppi Constructions Contractors v. Union of India and Banshidhar Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., the Hon’ble High Court observed that although courts ordinarily refrain from interfering in contractual and tender matters, judicial intervention is warranted where the decision-making process is arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to the mandatory terms of the tender.

Accordingly, the Hon’ble High Court set aside PSPCL’s decision declaring the successful bidder as the successful tenderer, quashed all consequential actions taken pursuant thereto, and granted liberty to PSPCL to initiate a fresh tender process in accordance with law.