SC Upholds Tender Sanctity, Bars Post-Bid Corrections

Supreme Court Upholds Sanctity of Tender Process, Bars Post-Bid Financial Corrections

Top Court Says Allowing Price Changes After Bid Opening Violates Fairness and Transparency

Ruling Overturns High Court Order Permitting Correction of ‘Typographical Error’ in Financial Bid

By Our Legal Reporter

New Delhi, September 15, 2025 — The Supreme Court has delivered a landmark judgment reinforcing the integrity of public tender processes, ruling that financial bids cannot be altered after they have been opened. The Court said such changes would undermine the fairness, transparency, and level playing field that competitive bidding is meant to ensure.

A bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan set aside a Calcutta High Court Division Bench order that had allowed a bidder to correct what it claimed was a “typographical error” in its financial bid after the bids were opened.

“Public tenders are the cornerstone of governmental procurement processes… The sanctity of public tenders and contracts is a fundamental principle that underpins the stability and predictability of legal and commercial relationships,” the Court observed.

The Case in Brief

The dispute arose from an electronic tender issued by the Public Works (Roads) Directorate, Government of West Bengal, for collecting Road User Fees (RUF) from commercial vehicles over a period of 1,095 days.

Tender Date: October 17, 2023
Earnest Money Deposit: ₹25 lakh
Bidders: Seven companies participated; four were technically qualified, including Prakash Asphaltings and Toll Highways (India) Ltd (appellant) and Mandeepa Enterprises (respondent).

When the financial bids were opened on December 8, 2023:

Prakash Asphaltings emerged as the highest bidder (H1) with a quote of ₹91.19 crore for the entire contract period.
Mandeepa Enterprises was the lowest bidder (H4) with a quote of ₹9,72,999 per day.

The Controversy

Mandeepa Enterprises later claimed that its bid contained a typographical error — it had intended to quote ₹106.54 crore for the entire contract period, but mistakenly uploaded the per-day figure in the Bill of Quantity (BOQ) template.

The company requested the tendering authority to treat the figure as an error and correct it. However, on December 20, 2023, the authority rejected the request, citing Clause 4(g) of the Notice Inviting Electronic Bid, which prohibits any change in the BOQ template under any circumstances.

High Court’s Intervention

Mandeepa Enterprises challenged the rejection before a Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court, which dismissed the petition on January 3, 2024, holding there was no scope for interference.

On appeal, a Division Bench of the High Court reversed the decision on February 23, 2024, calling the error “inadvertent” and directing the authority to evaluate Mandeepa’s bid at ₹106.54 crore, while offering other bidders the chance to match it.

Supreme Court’s Ruling

The Supreme Court disagreed with the High Court’s approach, holding that:

Post-bid financial corrections are impermissible — Once bids are opened, allowing changes would compromise the fairness of the process.
Tender conditions are binding — Clause 4(g) clearly barred any change in the BOQ template.
Public interest is broader than financial gain — The Court cautioned that public interest in tenders should not be narrowly confined to securing the highest revenue; procedural integrity is equally important.

The bench emphasised that competitive bidding is designed to provide a level playing field and that any relaxation for one bidder after bid opening would amount to discrimination against others.

Key Legal Principles Reaffirmed

Sanctity of Tender Process: The rules of the tender are sacrosanct and must be applied uniformly.
No Post-Bid Alterations: Even genuine mistakes cannot be corrected after bids are opened, unless expressly permitted by the tender terms.
Public Interest Beyond Money: Ensuring fairness and transparency is as important as maximising financial returns.

Implications of the Judgment

This ruling will have a far-reaching impact on public procurement in India:

For Bidders: Greater caution is needed in preparing bids; errors can be fatal.
For Authorities: Reinforces the need to strictly enforce tender terms to avoid legal challenges.
For Courts: Sets a precedent against judicial interference in tender evaluations unless there is clear illegality or mala fides.

Expert Reactions

Legal experts have hailed the decision as a victory for procedural discipline.

A senior procurement lawyer noted:

“This judgment sends a strong message that tender processes cannot be bent to accommodate individual mistakes, however genuine they may seem. The integrity of the process is paramount.”

Past Precedents Cited

The Court’s reasoning aligns with earlier rulings that stress strict adherence to tender conditions and reject post-bid negotiations or alterations, except in cases expressly allowed by the tender documents.

Conclusion

By overturning the High Court’s order, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the principle that the sanctity of the tender process is non-negotiable. The ruling underscores that fairness, transparency, and equal treatment are the bedrock of public procurement — and that even well-intentioned corrections after bid opening can erode these values.