Delhi HC strikes down Centre’s visa services tender process across four countries

The court said that these deficiencies struck at the very heart of transparency, fairness and equality in the public procurement process

The Delhi High Court has set aside the tender awarded by the central government to private firms for outsourcing consular, passport and visa (CPV) services at the Indian missions in Abu Dhabi, Kuwait, Singapore and Canberra and directed it to issue a fresh request for proposals (RFP) within one month inviting fresh bids.

The firms had participated in the tender process but were disqualified at the technical evaluation stage. (iStock | Representative)

A bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Shail Jain in its verdict delivered on Wednesday opined that the Centre while taking the decision, relied on undisclosed comparative standards, made unexplained deductions under objective evaluation criteria, and adopted inconsistent marking.

The court said that these deficiencies struck at the very heart of transparency, fairness and equality in the public procurement process.

“The use of undisclosed comparative standards, unexplained deductions under objective criteria, inconsistent marking and complete absence of recorded reasons strikes at the heart of transparency, fairness and equality in public Procurement. Therefore, exclusion of a lower bidder on the basis of an arbitrary evaluation process, is not merely an individual grievance but also raises concerns of public interest under Article 14 of the Constitution,” the court said in its verdict.

It added, “The impugned technical evaluation processes are set aside. Consequently, award of tender in favour of the private Respondents shall also stand nullified. The respondent numbers 1 and 2 are directed to issue fresh RFP for procurement of CPV Services across all four Missions, namely, Abu Dhabi (UAE), Kuwait, Singapore and Canberra (Australia), within a period of one month from the date of this judgment and make sincere efforts to conclude the process at the earliest.”

The verdict was delivered on petitions filed by two unsuccessful bidders—E Trav Tech Limited represented by senior advocates Sanjay Jain, Sacchin Puri, briefed by advocate Nakul Sachdeva, from Luthra and Luthra Law Offices and Verasys Limited. The firms had participated in the tender process but were disqualified at the technical evaluation stage, since they had failed to secure minimum 70% marks to qualify for opening of their financial bids. They then challenged the communications declaring them unsuccessful.

It was E Trav and Verasys Limited’s case that the criteria wise evaluation of their technical bids is arbitrary and the marks awarded to them under the respective parameters was unsupported by any reasons.

The Centre’s lawyer additional solicitor general Chetan Sharma, opposed the petition, saying that the same was a “belated attempt” to reopen a concluded tender process.

In its 44-page verdict, the court however permitted the incumbent to continue providing services to ensure that there is no disruption in the provision of public services or inconvenience to the public.