Cuttack: Orissa high court has dismissed a private paper supplier’s challenge to state govt’s tender for procuring paper for textbooks, observing that tendering authorities have the freedom to frame eligibility conditions according to their requirements.A division bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Chittaranjan Dash, in its Oct 7 judgment, said courts should be cautious while examining administrative decisions on tender conditions and should not interfere unless arbitrariness or mala fide is established.“Every administrative action does not call for interference and, therefore, the court must put a great caution in interfering therewith,” the bench observed, dismissing the writ petition.The dispute concerned eligibility criteria in a tender floated by the directorate of textbook production and marketing on Sept 11 for procuring 26,450 metric tonnes of 70 GSM maplitho reel paper with watermark, measuring 84 cm. The technical bids were scheduled to open on Oct 8.Under the eligibility criteria, bidders were required to demonstrate experience in supplying maplitho virgin paper with watermark in quantities equivalent to at least 60% of the tendered quantity or a minimum of 11,000 metric tonnes annually during each of the preceding three consecutive years to govt or semi-govt departments and organisations.Rejecting the challenge, the bench found no arbitrariness in requiring bidders to have supplied the specified paper in the preceding years. It also took note of the authorities’ decision to consider objections and revise the quantity requirement after deliberations.“The court must respect the freedom into the tender inviting authorities for incorporating any terms and conditions which is reasonable, rational and does not inculcate any sense of arbitrariness or mala fide,” the judges said.The court further clarified that tendering authorities could tailor conditions to their specific needs and that the absence of a similar requirement in other states did not, by itself, make the condition liable to judicial interference.The petitioner had alleged that the condition was excessive, arbitrary and tailored to favour select suppliers. It argued that the watermark requirement had no direct connection with textbook printing and would unnecessarily exclude potential bidders. The experience criterion, it said, restricted competition by limiting participation to a handful of suppliers despite the availability of other capable firms.The objections were also raised by several prospective bidders during a pre-bid meeting. Following deliberations, the authorities issued a corrigendum on September 30, reducing the minimum annual supply requirement from 11,000 tonnes to 10,000 tonnes.Finding no grounds to interfere with the tender conditions or the corrigendum, high court dismissed the petition.