Bilaspur : The Chhattisgarh High Court has refused to interfere with a government tender for supplying school and office furniture, saying courts have only a limited role in examining tender conditions, especially when procurement is done through the Government e-Marketplace (GeM) portal.
A Division Bench led by Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal dismissed a writ petition filed by a Janjgir-Champa-based startup, Singhaniya Furniture Manufacturing Business Pvt. Ltd. The company had challenged eligibility conditions in a ₹7.8 crore furniture tender floated by the State government.
The startup argued that the tender unfairly shut out startups and small businesses by not giving relaxation in experience, turnover, and past performance requirements. It said such relaxations are available under the Chhattisgarh Store Purchase Rules, and that the tender violated constitutional rights to equality and free trade by favouring established suppliers.
The tender, issued on January 9, 2026 through the GeM portal, required bidders to show an average annual turnover equal to the tender value and proof of supplying at least 80 percent of similar furniture to a government body in any one of the past three years. According to the petitioner, these conditions defeated policies meant to promote startups and MSMEs.
The State government opposed the plea, saying the tender followed GeM norms and the Store Purchase Rules. It argued that relaxations for startups are optional, not mandatory, and may be denied in large-value tenders where timely and uninterrupted supply is essential. The State also pointed out that the petitioner had not challenged the policy decision to procure furniture through GeM itself.
After hearing both sides, the High Court held that the tender conditions applied equally to all bidders and were not arbitrary or discriminatory. The Court said that deciding eligibility benchmarks is a policy matter for the government, and procurement through GeM is a legally recognised method.
Referring to Supreme Court rulings on tender disputes, the Bench reiterated that courts can only examine whether the decision-making process is fair. They cannot step in to rewrite commercial terms unless there is clear evidence of bias, bad faith, or extreme arbitrariness. Finding no such flaw and noting that the relevant rules were not challenged, the Court dismissed the petition.
Case Title : Singhaniya Furniture Manufacturing Business Pvt. Ltd. and another vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others