A massive ₹1,432.12 crore procurement process initiated by the Bihar State Milk Co-operative Federation Limited, known as COMFED, has run into controversy following repeated amendments to its bidding terms. The contract involves supplying recipe-based fortified food products, such as khichdi, porridge, and halwa, to Anganwadi centres across Bihar. Since its initial notification on July 28, the tender framework was altered three times, involving two submission deadline extensions and a major revision of eligibility criteria. Four firms had entered bids by September 8, but disqualifications quickly narrowed the contest to just two contenders. The revisions have drawn strong criticism from industry observers, who allege that the escalating thresholds effectively locked micro, small, and medium enterprises out of the race.
Sharp Jump in Earnest Money Deposit and Financial Thresholds
The steepest barrier emerged in the financial eligibility mandates, particularly the Earnest Money Deposit. Originally set at ₹10 lakh, the required deposit was subsequently increased to ₹28.64 crore, marking a near 286-fold jump. Industry critics pointed out that arranging a bank guarantee or liquid funds of this magnitude is practically impossible for local suppliers, shutting them out before technical evaluations even began. Furthermore, the revised criteria made it mandatory for bidders to possess a minimum net worth of ₹75 crore. Entrants were also required to demonstrate an average annual turnover of ₹100 crore specifically derived from Integrated Child Development Services or government supplies over the preceding five financial years, disqualifying regional manufacturers that lack prior large-scale state contracts.
High Volume Benchmarks and Restrictive Joint Venture Rules
Technical benchmarks were similarly elevated beyond the reach of local enterprise. The tender mandated an annual manufacturing and supply track record of at least 15,000 metric tonnes of fortified food, a threshold that only a handful of large corporate suppliers can satisfy. Joint venture guidelines added another operational hurdle. The norms stipulated that the lead partner must independently satisfy all technical and manufacturing criteria, limiting the secondary partner strictly to meeting balance sheet requirements like net worth. This restriction effectively barred smaller local firms from pooling their manufacturing capabilities with established partners to mount a viable bid.
Scrutiny Over Administrative Authority and Pre-emptive Legal Caveat
COMFED’s institutional mandate has also come under question. Critics have sought official documentation, including relevant circulars, office memorandums, or government resolutions, that legally designated the cooperative federation as the project authority and nodal agency for Anganwadi supplies. Scrutiny deepened after COMFED pre-emptively lodged a caveat in the High Court before completing the selection process. Civil court advocate Sanjeev Saurabh characterized the terms as one-sided and arbitrary, arguing that they restrict competition to a select group of wealthy firms and raise concerns under the equal opportunity provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution. Administrative experts note that while altering tender terms does not automatically prove wrongdoing, establishing the validity of the process will depend on an independent review as the remaining two bidders move toward financial evaluation.
Follow for daily updates on cybercrime, corporate fraud, DFIR, hacking, investigations, and digital forensics
