Delhi HC: MKU's Defense Bid Rejected Over License From Wrong Department

Quick Summary: On December 23, 2025, the Delhi High Court dismissed the requests made by MKU Limited against the Union of India. The case was about MKU's bids for defense equipment being turned down because of license problems. The court agreed with the decision because the licenses were from different parts of the government.

Background of the Case

Petitioner and Respondent:
- Petitioners: MKU Limited and others
- Respondents: Union of India and others

MKU Limited filed several requests to try to change decisions that stopped them from bidding on defense contracts. These contracts were for things like helmets, bulletproof jackets, and night sights for rifles.

Key Dates and Events

• February 4, 2025: Proposals were requested for ballistic helmets and bulletproof jackets.
• March 26-28, 2025: MKU Limited was said to not meet the technical requirements.
• June 18, 2025: MKU was given a new license by DPIIT.

The Licensing Issue

What Happened?
MKU Limited was disqualified because their industrial license came from the Department of Commerce (DoC) instead of the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT).

Court's View:
The court stressed that the proposal needed a license from DPIIT, which MKU did not have when they made their bid. The difference between licenses from DoC and DPIIT was important because they have different rules and security checks.

Arguments Presented

Petitioner's Argument:
MKU argued that both licenses are given under the same law and should be seen as the same. They said the rejection was unfair and not in line with the Defense Acquisition Procedure (DAP) 2020.

Respondent's Argument:
The Union of India said the DPIIT license was a must-have according to the proposal request. They pointed out that getting a license from DPIIT involves extra security checks, which are important for defense contracts.

Court's Conclusion

• Distinction Valid: The court found a valid difference between the licenses from DoC and DPIIT, mainly due to the different security rules and committee makeups.
• No Arbitrary Action: The court decided that the authority asking for bids can set conditions, and these were not unfair or unreasonable.
• Dismissal of Petitions: The court dismissed MKU's requests, agreeing with the original decision to disqualify them.

Judges:
- Justice Tushar Rao Gedela
- Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya

The court's decision shows how important it is to understand and meet all the specific requirements in government bids, especially in sensitive areas like defense.