Telangana High Court dismisses plea challenging tender for bunker beds in KGBV schools
The Telangana High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the tender process for supplying bunker beds to Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya schools. The court held there was no arbitrariness or illegality and noted that non-participants in the tender cannot ordinarily challenge contracts
By Legal Correspondent
Hyderabad: Justice Surepalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the tender process relating to the supply of bunker beds to Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya (KGBV) schools in the State. The writ petition was filed by the Telangana Small Scale Industries Steel and Wooden Furniture Manufacturers Association and others questioning the action of the authorities in entering into supplementary agreements dated November 29, 2025, with private suppliers for the supply, commissioning and installation of 45,360 bunker beds along with mattresses and pillows.
The petitioners contended that the original tender conditions required the work to be completed within 120 days and that the authorities ought to have issued a fresh tender instead of extending the time through supplementary agreements. The petitioners also alleged irregularities in the tender process, including favouritism towards certain bidders and violation of eligibility conditions. They further argued that the suppliers had failed to complete the work within the stipulated period and that extending the time was contrary to the terms of the tender.
On the other hand, the State contended that the petitioners had not participated in the tender process and therefore had no locus to challenge the agreements. It was also submitted that the tender document itself contained clauses permitting extension of time and levy of liquidated damages in case of delay.
After examining the record, the Court held that there was no material to show arbitrariness, mala fides or illegality in the action of the authorities. The Court noted that the delay occurred partly due to the time taken by the authorities to finalise colour codes and other specifications for the bunker beds. The Court further observed that the tender conditions allowed extension of time and therefore the supplementary agreements extending the period for supply were contractual in nature. It also held that a party that did not participate in the tender process cannot ordinarily challenge the tender or the resulting contract. Holding that the petitioners had failed to establish any illegality in the tender process, the Court dismissed the writ petition.
