Relaxation of restrictive tender conditions ensures competitive bidding and prevents tailor-made eligibility criteria.

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging Clause 14 of a tender notice dated April 8, 2026, issued for the collection of entry and tourist fees

The impugned clause required bidders to possess a certificate from a local body or government department of a hill state certifying three years of experience in collecting such fees, or alternatively, experience in executing related work worth at least two crores in a year

The petitioner contended that the condition was "tailor-made" to favor only two or three specific bidders, as most local bodies had abolished such fee collection, thereby stifling competition and potentially causing revenue loss to the Nagar Palika Parishad

During the proceedings, the Executive Officer of Nagar Palika Parishad, Nainital, filed a supplementary affidavit clarifying the intent of the clause

1. Whether the eligibility criteria stipulated in Clause 14 of the tender notice were arbitrary and designed to restrict competition

2. Whether the proposed relaxation of the tender conditions by the respondent authority satisfied the petitioner’s grievances

The court applied the general principles of administrative law and public procurement, which dictate that tender conditions should be designed to ensure maximum revenue through fair competition rather than being exclusionary or "tailor-made"

The court also recognized the authority of the state/local bodies to relax tender conditions to broaden the pool of eligible bidders while maintaining essential qualifications for work execution

The court examined the respondent's supplementary affidavit and the oral submissions made by Senior Counsel for the Nagar Palika Parishad.

The respondent clarified that Clause 14 would be relaxed so that no bid would be rejected solely for lacking the three-year experience certificate from a hill state local body

However, the respondent maintained that the alternative requirement—experience in executing related work worth two crores or more in a single year—would remain mandatory for all bidders to ensure technical and financial competence

The court noted the petitioner’s concession that this relaxation addressed the core grievance, as it removed the restrictive "hill state" experience barrier while retaining a standardized financial threshold for eligibility

The holding establishes that the three-year specific experience in hill states under Clause 14 is waived, but the requirement for related work experience worth two crores or more per year remains a valid and enforceable eligibility criterion