New Delhi [India], July 15 : The Delhi High Court has set aside the technical evaluation process adopted by the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) for outsourcing Consular, Passport and Visa (CPV) services at Indian Missions in Abu Dhabi (UAE), Kuwait, Singapore and Canberra (Australia), holding that the evaluation suffered from arbitrariness, irrationality and lack of transparency.
The Court directed the Union Government to issue fresh Requests for Proposal (RFPs) for all four Missions within one month and make sincere efforts to conclude the tender process at the earliest.
A Division Bench of Justice Anil Kshetrapal and Justice Shail Jain allowed a batch of petitions filed by E Trav Tech Limited and Verasys Limited challenging their technical disqualification in the tender process.
The Court also nullified the award of the tenders in favour of the successful private bidders. However, to ensure continuity of public services, it permitted the existing service providers to continue operating until the fresh tender process is completed and new L-1 bidders are selected in accordance with law.
Holding that the petitioners had made out a case for interference, the Bench observed that the parameter-wise marks awarded during the technical evaluation were vitiated by arbitrariness, irrationality and lack of transparency, rendering the evaluation unsustainable under Article 14 of the Constitution.
The Court further held that the MEA and the concerned Indian Missions violated Rules 173(iv) and 189 of the General Financial Rules, 2017, as well as the provisions of the RFP, by failing to record and communicate reasons for the technical evaluation and disqualification of the bidders.
It said that mere disclosure of parameter-wise marks, without explaining the basis for deductions or comparative assessment, rendered the decision-making process opaque, arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice and fair administrative action.
The Bench noted that although the respondents later furnished the parameter-wise break-up of marks pursuant to directions of the Supreme Court, they failed to disclose the reasons for awarding such marks or the comparative benchmarks adopted during the evaluation. As a result, the petitioners were left without any means to understand why their otherwise compliant proposals were treated as inferior.
The Court found inconsistencies in the evaluation of identical proposals across different Missions. It observed that the same documentary material submitted by the petitioners received significantly different scores under identical criteria without any explanation.
It also pointed to instances where bidders received zero marks despite proposing appointment windows and turnaround times that met the standards prescribed under the RFPs.
Rejecting the Centre's preliminary objection that the petitions were barred by the principles of res judicata, the Bench held that the present challenge arose from a fresh cause of action after disclosure of the parameter-wise evaluation in May 2026.
It observed that the legality of the evaluation could not have been challenged earlier because the relevant material had not been disclosed at that stage.
The Court also observed that judicial review in tender matters extends to examining whether the decision-making process is fair, transparent and non-arbitrary, even though courts ordinarily do not sit in appeal over the merits of technical evaluations.
It held that the absence of objective standards, comparative benchmarks and recorded reasons undermined the constitutional guarantee of a level playing field in public procurement.
Highlighting the public interest element, the Bench noted that E Trav had placed on record a comparative statement showing that it had quoted substantially lower financial bids than the successful bidders across all four Missions.
Since this position was not disputed by the respondents, the Court observed that the arbitrary exclusion of a lower bidder directly impacts the public exchequer, making transparency in technical evaluation all the more essential.