The Chhattisgarh High Court in Bilaspur has dismissed a writ petition challenging the tender process for operating the state’s 108 Sanjeevi Express emergency ambulance services, reiterating that courts should not interfere in government tenders unless there is clear proof of arbitrariness, mala fide action, or violation of established procedures.
The petition was filed by M/s Jai Ambey Emergency Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., a company engaged in emergency medical response services including ambulance operations and health helpline management. The company had earlier operated the 108 ambulance service in Chhattisgarh after securing the contract in 2019.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal delivered the order on March 12, 2026.
The petitioner challenged a tender issued on September 24, 2025, which invited bids for the operation, maintenance and management of the 108 Sanjeevi Express ambulance services across the state. The company argued that the technical evaluation criteria and marking system in the tender were arbitrary and structured in a manner that allegedly favoured another bidder, EMRI Green Health Services.
According to the petitioner, earlier tenders issued in April and July 2025 had been cancelled, and the evaluation criteria were later modified through a corrigendum. It was claimed that these changes created an unfair advantage for the rival bidder.
The company also pointed out that the tender followed the Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS) method, under which technical scores carry substantial weight in the final evaluation. The petitioner alleged that the revised evaluation framework was designed in such a way that the competing bidder would secure higher technical marks while other bidders would be placed at a disadvantage.
Claiming that the conditions were effectively tailor-made, the petitioner chose not to participate in the final tender process and instead approached the High Court seeking cancellation of the tender.
Opposing the petition, the State Government and the Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Limited (CMSCL) argued that the tender conditions were framed to ensure selection of a technically competent agency capable of efficiently delivering emergency medical services. The authorities explained that the earlier tenders were cancelled due to technical and administrative reasons, and that the revised evaluation criteria were introduced after considering suggestions raised by stakeholders during the pre-bid stage.
During the hearing, the respondents also informed the court that the tender process had already been completed. A Letter of Intent was issued on December 29, 2025 in favour of EMRI Green Health Services, followed by the signing of a service agreement on January 23, 2026. The selected agency has since begun preparations for implementing the project, including procurement of ambulances and recruitment of personnel.
The new project aims to strengthen emergency healthcare services across Chhattisgarh. Under the arrangement, a fleet of 375 ambulances, including Basic Life Support (BLS), Advanced Life Support (ALS), and neonatal ambulances, will be deployed to improve emergency response and expand healthcare coverage across the state.
After examining the record and hearing the arguments from all parties, the High Court observed that the petitioner had not participated in the third tender process and had also failed to place any concrete material before the court to establish that the decision-making process was arbitrary or intended to favour a particular bidder.
The bench noted that mere allegations of favouritism without supporting evidence are insufficient to invalidate a public tender.
The court further emphasized that judicial review in tender matters is limited, and that courts normally examine the fairness of the decision-making process rather than the merits of the decision itself. Since the tender process had already resulted in a concluded contract and implementation of the project had begun, the court said that interference at this stage could adversely affect public interest, especially when the project involves critical emergency healthcare services.
In view of these findings, the High Court held that no case was made out for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and dismissed the writ petition as devoid of merit.
Case: WPC No. 137 of 2026 — M/s Jai Ambey Emergency Services (I) Pvt. Ltd. vs State of Chhattisgarh & Others.