Authority: High Court of Judicature at Madras

Order Date: 05.08.2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: Gurudeva Enterprises (a proprietorship concern), represented by its proprietor A. Karthikeyan, S/o. Amaresan, located at Plot No.19‑A SIDCO Industrial Estate, Orikkai Post, Kancheepuram, Tamil Nadu.
  • Respondents: (1) State of Tamil Nadu, represented by Additional Chief Secretary, Environment, Climate Change and Forest Department; (2) District Forest Officer, Vellore District Forest Office, Tirupattur Division; (3) Union of India, represented by Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (Wildlife Division); (4) Director General of Foreign Trade, Ministry of Commerce and Industry; (5) MSTC Limited.
  • Petition Numbers: W.P. No. 30452 of 2026 and W.P. No. 30457 of 2026 (along with related WMP Nos. 33431, 33424, 33444, 33425 of 2026).
  • Reliefs Sought: (i) Quash G.O. 2(D) No. 29 dated 02‑03‑2026 permitting a global tender‑cum‑auction of 100 Metric Tonnes of seized Red Sanders wood; (ii) Quash the Global Notice dated 31‑07‑2026 issued by the District Forest Officer and the e‑tender‑cum‑auction floated by MSTC Limited (Auction No. MSTC/SRO/Tamilnadu Forest department/2/Vellore/26‑27/17732 dated 30‑06‑2026).
  • Petitioner’s Arguments: Cited DGFT Notification No. 47/2025‑26 (04‑11‑2025) restricting export quotas to Red Sanders derived from artificial propagation or private patta lands, arguing seized logs are wild and ineligible. Asserted earlier one‑time relaxation under DGFT Notification No. 50/2015‑2020 (27‑12‑2022) allowing 299.732 MT was exhausted by G.O.(D) No. 1 dated 03‑01‑2019, so the State cannot rely on the reported seized figure of 747.0509 MT as a recurring allocation. Challenged tender conditions: minimum lot size 10 MT, starting price > USD 62,000 per MT, 25 % post‑bid Earnest Money Deposit, mandatory bidding in USD, alleging exclusion of domestic traders, artisans, and Khadi/Village industries, violating Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.
  • Respondent’s Arguments: Asserted the auction is a policy decision to prevent physical degradation of stock stored in godowns and to maximize revenue for the public exchequer. Stated that disposal of confiscated forest produce follows permissions, allocations, and export relaxations issued by MoEFCC and DGFT. Emphasised that Red Sanders is a high‑value international timber species; the tender’s minimum lot size, USD pricing, and 25 % EMD ensure participation of financially capable and genuine buyers, applied uniformly without discrimination.

Court’s Reasoning

1. The court examined the scope of judicial review in tender/contract matters, citing Tata Cellular v. Union of India (1994) 6 SCC 651 and Michigan Rubber (India) Ltd. v. State of Karnataka (2012) 8 SCC 216, emphasizing that courts have limited jurisdiction to intervene unless the tender process is arbitrary, mala‑fide, or irrational.

2. The court noted that fixation of tender values, lot sizes, and qualification criteria falls within the executive’s latitude, provided the process is not manifestly unreasonable or discriminatory.

3. The petitioner failed to demonstrate any malice, arbitrariness, or prejudice to public interest in the auction conditions.

4. The court accepted the respondent’s reliance on DGFT Notification No. 50/2015‑2020 dated 27‑12‑2022, which empowers the State Government to auction up to 299.732 MT of confiscated Red Sanders wood, and found no contrary material evidence from the petitioner.

5. The court rejected the petitioner’s contention that USD‑only pricing creates confusion for Indian bidders, holding that such commercial terms are standard for international commodities and applied uniformly.

Final Outcome

  • Both writ petitions (W.P. 30452/2026 and W.P. 30457/2026) are dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.
  • All connected interim applications are closed.

Topics: Legal Dispute – Forest Produce Auction, Export Regulation