In Brief
Two appeals challenged a Delhi High Court judgment that allowed a writ petition by Resoursys Telecom against Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti's rejection of its technical bid for a tablet procurement tender. The rejection was based on non-fulfilment of the past performance criterion—the bidder had supplied primarily smartphones (211,878 units) but only 37,141 tablets, falling 10.2% short of the required 60% of bid quantity. The High Court held that smartphones constitute 'similar Category Products' to tablets. The Supreme Court reversed this, holding that tender inviting authorities have the primary authority to interpret tender terms unless their decision is shown to be manifestly perverse, mala fide, or arbitrary. The GeM portal and Customs Authority classified smartpones and tablets differently, supporting NVS's reasonable interpretation. The Court held that courts should exercise restraint and not substitute their own interpretative views for those of the tender author.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.