LexStreak
Read free →
Madras High Court· 07 September 2026

Can an eligibility criteria prescribed in a tender be relaxed where the participant falls short of the required experience by 39 days?

N.Nattathy v. Tender Inviting Authority / The Managing Director
WA(MD).952/2026 · 2026:MHC:3632 · W.A.(MD)No.952 of 2026
Coram: Justice C.V.Karthikeyan · Justice R.Sakthivel
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow s.11 Tamil Nadu Transparency in …📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

No. The eligibility criteria is mandatory and could never be relaxed by the tender inviting authority. Any relaxation would cause injustice to those who would have participated, had they known that the eligibility criteria was flexible in nature. The appellant can never claim that this short fall of 39 days in experience should be overlooked on the ground that the work was seasonal in nature.

Headnote

Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 — s.11 — Tender — Eligibility criteria — Rejection at the technical stage — Missing documents clause — Judicial review of tenders — Tender — Eligibility criteria — Mandatory, not relaxable — Held: An eligibility criteria prescribed in a tender is mandatory and can never be relaxed, since any relaxation would cause injustice to those who would have participated had they known that the eligibility criteria was flexible in nature. (¶36, 39) Tender document — Uploading in a particular manner — No relaxation — Held further: Where a tender document has to be uploaded in a particular manner, it should be uploaded only in that particular manner or not at all; non-submission of the income tax returns required for the preceding three financial years is fatal. (¶46, 47, 55) Tender — Clause for obtaining missing documents — Scope — Held further: A clause permitting missing documents to be called for applies only where a document mentioned in the list was not uploaded; it places no obligation on the tender inviting authority to advise a participant to upload documents which are mandatory in nature. (¶55) Judicial review of tenders — No equity in commercial matters — Held further: There can be no equity in commercial matters, and it is not for a participant to dictate how the bids are to be evaluated and examined; the rejection at the technical stage cannot be faulted. Writ Appeals dismissed. (¶48, 56, 57)

Headnote

You've used your free headnotes this month

The answer above and the Court's own paragraphs stay free. LexStreak's full headnote on this judgment needs an account — a free one opens it again.

Create my free account
In the Court's own words
Paragraph 36This eligibility criteria is mandatory. Any relaxation would cause injustice to those, who would have participated, had they known that the eligibility criteria was flexible in nature.
Paragraph 40It had also been contended that the appellant did not have the requisite qualification of experience of three years. The appellant fell short of 39 days.
Paragraph 41We hold that the appellant can never claim that this short fall of 39 days in experience should be overlooked on the ground that the work was seasonal in nature. The appellant can also never claim that the non- submission of the income tax returns for the financial year 2024-25 was not fatal and should be overlooked by the first respondent. As a matter of fact, it is not only the income tax returns which should have been filed, but also, the audited balance sheet and profit and loss account for the said financial year. We hold that by non-submission of the said income tax returns and the supporting documents, the bid of the appellant necessarily had to be rejected.
Paragraph 43This requirement of prior experience is mandatory and could never be relaxed by the first respondent. The appellant can also not seek relaxation of the same.
Acts & Sections
s.11 Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of N.Nattathy v. Tender Inviting Authority / The Managing Director — and get the Madras High Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Is the non-submission of an income tax return expressly required by a tender document fatal, where the document was available with the bidder but not uploaded?Does a tender clause providing for obtaining missing documents oblige the tender inviting authority to call for a mandatory document the bidder never mentioned?Can an unsuccessful bidder require a tender to be cancelled on the ground that only a single tenderer was left after his own bid was rejected?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Madras High Court. Corrections