Acting Chief Justice led bench recognized "an onerous eligibility condition for prospective bidders but refuses relief

In Kumar Narendra Nayak vs. State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, District-Banka (2025), Patna High Court's Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Partha Sarthy disposed of the writ petition by advising the Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation Limited "to give a re-look to the  eligibility condition, especially with respect to preventing a person from participating if F.I.R. has been lodged or cognizance taken against any one of the family members of the prospective bidder." It observed:"A person could have a large number of filial connections and would have many persons in his kindred who might not abide by law. That ought not to prevent an honest businessman to participate in the bid." 

The petitioner, a prospective bidder was aggrieved by the condition in the tender document that only such bidders shall be permitted to participate in the bid who would file an affidavit clearly specifying that no Court of law has taken cognizance or F.I.R. has been lodged against such bidder or his family members/Director/partner in any manner related to transportation, handling, pilferage, blackmarketing etc. of food grains. 

Although the Division Bench recognized that it is an onerous eligibility condition because as a prospective bidder he/she would not be able to control the activities of his/her relatives or family members, and only for their wrong doing, he would not have the eligibility to participate in the bid, it refused to interfere with such condition in the tender document because the terms and conditions of the tender are in the domain of the policy making body, which in this case is the Corporation. 

The judgement dated May 6, 2025 records that "such F.I.R. or action is only limited to transportation, handling, pilferage and blackmarketing of food grains and not F.I.R. or complaint for any other offences under the Court. The sinister impact of the aforenoted eligibility condition is thus very limited and would operate in a very narrow space."

The bench observed that it is for the reason of several instances of irregularities in the transportation, handling and innumerable number of cases of pilferage and blackmarketing of food grains, such a condition has been incorporated. 

The Court concluded: "The eligibility criteria, referred to above, in such circumstances, cannot be said to be violative of Article 19 of the Constitution of India, affecting the right of a person to carry his vocation for his livelihood."