State-Specific Past Performance Condition Is Unconstitutional For School Supplies Tenders
A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe heard appeals against High Court orders upholding eligibility criteria in three tender notices issued by the Samagra Shiksha, Chhattisgarh State Project Office for supply of Sports Kits to government school students. The challenge concerned a past-performance requirement that bidders must have supplied sports goods worth at least Rs.6.00 crores cumulatively to Chhattisgarh State Government agencies in the previous three financial years.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, held that the impugned clause was arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, and quashed the tender notices dated 21.07.2025 and the High Court orders of 11 and 12 August 2025. The Court emphasized that the “doctrine of level playing field” required that “all equally placed competitors must be given an equal opportunity to participate” and that the State could not “close the market to outsiders without just cause.” The Court, in its reasoning, observed: The Court further noted that “the impugned tender condition is arbitrary, unreasonable and is discriminatory.”
Background
Vinishma Technologies Pvt. Ltd., a company that supplied sports kits to various State departments, challenged three tender notices issued on 21 July 2025 for supply of Sports Kits to students of primary, upper primary and high/higher secondary schools across 33 districts of Chhattisgarh. The tenders — collectively worth around Rs.39.81 crores — required past local supplies as a qualification (condition no. 4). The appellant submitted a representation on 29 July 2025; after no response, it filed writ petitions in the Chhattisgarh High Court. During pendency, a corrigendum dated 07.08.2025 deleted certain other conditions (nos. 1, 11 and 13), but condition no. 4 remained.
The Division Bench of the High Court repelled the challenge, accepted the State’s submission that the criterion was designed to ensure capable and reliable bidders for a project of public importance, and placed reliance on precedent including Association of Registration Plates v. Union of India and the prevalence of similar clauses in other States. The State argued that Chhattisgarh’s geographic and security conditions (Maoist-affected areas) justified the local past-performance requirement; it also pointed out that financial bids had been opened on 21.08.2025 and successful bidders identified.
On appeal, the Supreme Court reviewed settled principles of tender law, including Ramana Dayaram Shetty and the “level playing field” doctrine articulated in Bharat Forge, and held that while tendering authorities enjoyed broad latitude to set terms, those terms must bear a rational nexus to procurement objectives and must not erect artificial barriers to competition. The Court found no sufficient nexus between the restricted local past-performance requirement and the object of procuring quality Sports Kits at best price, observed that the restriction was disproportionate and promoted the possibility of cartelisation, and concluded that the clause offended Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). The Court quashed the High Court orders and the impugned tender notices and granted liberty to the respondents to issue fresh tender notices.
Case No.: 2025 INSC 1182 Case Title: VINISHMA TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): [Not indicated in the judgment] For the Respondent(s): [Not indicated in the judgment]