Supreme Court Upholds Delhi HC Decision on CPV Service Tenders
The Supreme Court has upheld a decision by the Delhi High Court to nullify the tenders for outsourcing Consular, Passport, and Visa (CPV) services at Indian missions located in Abu Dhabi, Kuwait, Singapore, and Canberra. This ruling comes as part of the case Union Of India v. E Trav Tech.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant alongside Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana dismissed the Union government’s challenge against the High Court’s ruling. However, the Supreme Court provided guidance to ensure that there is no interruption in services at the affected Indian missions.
“After hearing the learned counsel and taking note of the submissions, we believe that the operations of the concerned establishments should not be disrupted while the fresh tender process is underway,” the Court observed.
The Supreme Court allowed interim arrangements, which may involve the existing successful lowest-bid (L-1) bidders or other agencies, to maintain uninterrupted services during the transition to a new tender process.
“Engineers India Limited (EIL) and the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) are permitted to make suitable interim arrangements, which may include engaging the successful L-1 bidders whose performance has been satisfactory, or any other suitable agency,” the Court stated. It clarified that these interim measures are temporary and will not confer any special rights to any party, pending the outcome of the new Request for Proposal (RFP) process.
More Read
The Court directed the MEA to expedite the new tender process, aiming for completion within three months.
Background of the Case
The Delhi High Court’s July 15 judgment overturned the technical evaluation process and the resulting tender award for CPV services at the four Indian missions. The High Court identified issues of arbitrariness, irrationality, and lack of transparency in the evaluation, thus mandating the Central government to re-issue the tender within a month. Meanwhile, it allowed the existing service providers to continue operations until the new tender process concludes.
Challenging this decision, the government argued before the Supreme Court that the nullification had disrupted embassy operations, diverting diplomatic staff from their regular duties. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta defended the evaluation process, arguing that bidders were assessed on their merits rather than through a rigid comparative marking formula.
More Read
However, the Supreme Court bench questioned the deviation from the tender conditions. CJI Kant remarked that the lack of justification by the authorities led to the High Court’s decision on July 15. Justice Bagchi added that the government could not alter the terms of a tender document once the process had commenced.
“The High Court noted that the bid assessment terms were not clear, creating an unworkable situation. As per the law declared by this Court, you cannot change tender document terms after the process has started,” he noted.
SG Mehta indicated that the MEA had reasons for its decisions and requested permission to present these before the High Court.
The Supreme Court allowed the continuation of interim measures at the four missions until the new tender process is finalized. Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Shyam Divan, representing certain bidders, expressed no objection to these interim arrangements, ensuring continuity of services.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld the Delhi High Court’s decision to annul the tenders but allowed interim arrangements until the completion of a fresh tender process.
