Facts of the Case

Radiant Engineering Company, a partnership firm based in Jorhat, Assam, along with its managing partner, filed this writ petition challenging a re-notice dated 28.03.2022 issued by the Mariani Municipal Board in connection with a tender for supply and installation of a Solid Waste Segregation Machine/System. The respondents included the State of Assam, the Director of Municipal Administration, the Deputy Commissioner of Jorhat, and the Mariani Municipal Board. The Municipal Board also filed an interlocutory application seeking directions against the petitioner. This is fundamentally a municipal tender/administrative law dispute under Article 226 of the Constitution — GST is mentioned in the case only because GST registration and compliance are, as in most government tenders, listed among the standard eligibility or documentation requirements. The judgment does not decide any question of GST law.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the re-notice dated 28.03.2022 issued by the Mariani Municipal Board was arbitrary, irrational, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
  2. Whether the tendering authority could be directed to proceed with a fresh, properly framed tender process.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Contended that the re-notice suffered from unreasonableness, irrationality, and arbitrariness in its terms and conditions, violating Article 14 of the Constitution.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Municipal Board, as tendering authority, defended its right to formulate the terms and conditions of the tender notice and submitted that the underlying project was time-bound.

Court Order / Findings

  • Held that the re-notice dated 28.03.2022 suffered from unreasonableness, irrationality, arbitrariness and violated Article 14, and accordingly set it aside.
  • The writ petition was partly allowed to that extent; the earlier interim order dated 05.04.2022 was merged into the final order.
  • The connected interlocutory application (I.A.(Civil)/3155/2022) stood disposed of, with no order as to costs.
  • The Municipal Board was granted liberty to float a fresh tender process, framing terms with a reasonable and rational nexus to its objectives, taking the Court's observations into account.
  • Counsel for the Municipal Board assured the Court that a fresh tender process would be initiated expeditiously given the time-bound nature of the project.

Important Clarification

Readers should not mistake this for a GST ruling. It is a public-procurement/administrative law decision on the reasonableness of tender conditions. GST appears in the tender documentation only as one of many standard compliance requirements bidders must meet — the Court's actual holding concerns Article 14 and the arbitrariness of the re-notice, not any GST provision.

Sections Involved

  • Article 14, Constitution of India — right to equality, applied to test arbitrariness in tender conditions
  • Article 226, Constitution of India — writ jurisdiction of the High Court

Decision – In Favour of

The petitioners (Radiant Engineering Company) — writ petition partly allowed; the challenged re-notice was set aside and a fresh tender process was directed, but this was a tender-law outcome, not a decision on any GST question.

Case Details

Gauhati High Court (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh); WP(C)/2498/2022 with I.A.(Civil)/3155/2022; CNR: GAHC010068302022; Coram: Single Judge (name not legible in the extracted order); Order concludes with disposal on the merits of the tender challenge.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.