The court instructed the state to issue a fresh NIQ with clear requirements and complete the process within three months. It also dismissed the writ petitions by Manaksia Aluminium Company Limited, with parties bearing their costs.
The court questioned whether amending the clauses or maintaining the Meghalaya Industrial and Investment Promotion Policy (MIIPP) registration requirement changed the eligibility criteria. Manaksia Aluminium Company Limited had challenged conditions in the original NIQ, including residency, manufacturing units in Meghalaya, MIIPP registration and a trading license from the District Council.
The state government amended the NIQ, relaxing Clause 1 to include Indian citizens and changing Clause A (1) to prefer manufacturers in Meghalaya. However, the company argued that the MIIPP registration requirement still prevented it from bidding, as it lacks a manufacturing unit in the state.
The petitioner was represented by Philemon Nongbri, while the government was represented by Additional Advocate General ND Chullai and Attorney ZE Nongkynrih.
The court has instructed the state to issue a revised NIQ with clear and inclusive requirements, ensuring a transparent and competitive procurement process. The case underscores the judiciary's role in upholding fairness and transparency in government procurement, particularly in projects aimed at benefiting economically disadvantaged communities.
