Courts should show restraint in cases requiring interpretation of tender documents: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday observed that the constitutional courts have to show restraint in matters which require interpretation of tender documents [Agmatel India Pvt. Ltd. v. Resoursys Telecom & Ors.]..A Bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath held that the author of the tender document is the best person to understand and appreciate its requirements, and technical evaluation or comparison of such documents by the court is impermissible.“The author of the tender document is taken to be the best person to understand and appreciate its requirements; and if its interpretation is manifestly in consonance with the language of the tender document or subserving the purchase of the tender, the Court would prefer to keep restraint," the Court held.“Even if the interpretation given to the tender document by the person inviting offers is not as such acceptable to the Constitutional Court, that, by itself, would not be a reason for interfering with the interpretation given” the Court added..The observations came in two appeals challenging a Delhi High Court order that disapproved the technical disqualification and consequential rejection of the technical bid of Resoursys Telecom in respect of a tender floated by Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (NVS). Agmatel India was a bidder whose offer was accepted by NVS after disqualifying Resoursys..The tender pertained to the supply of 68,940 electronic tablets for school children. The condition leading to the dispute pertained to experience and past performance of bidders.The requirement concerning same or similar category products formed the bone of contention in the appeals..The limited question to be considered by the apex court was whether the High Court was justified in interfering with a view taken by NVS in rejecting the technical bid for want of fulfilment of past performance criterion.After opening the technical bids, NVS rejected the bid of Resoursys, while stating the reason of rejection as ‘technical specification mismatch’.Aggrieved, Resoursys filed a writ petition before the High Court, which was allowed. The High Court held that the rejection of the technical bid of Resoursys was unreasonable and arbitrary, and directed NVS to reconsider the technical bid..On appeal, the Supreme Court observed that the scope of judicial review in contractual matters, and particularly in relation to the process of interpretation of tender document, has been the subject matter of discussion in its various decisions.“This Court has disapproved the interference by the High Court in the interpretation by the tender inviting authority of the eligibility term relating to the category of vehicles required to be held by the bidders, in the tender floated for supply of vehicles for the carriage of troops and equipment” the Bench underscored in the order..In view of these observations, the top Court set aside the order of the Delhi High Court..[Read Order]