Law: Constitution of Pakistan

Section: 4 and 10-A, 199

Case Summary: Facts: The Government of Punjab initiated a procurement process for medical devices and surgical disposables in April 2025. The petitioner and other firms, including respondent No.6, submitted bids, which were evaluated by the Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC). Certain objections by the petitioner were partly accepted by the Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC), but respondent No.6 challenged the GRC decision before the MD PPRA. The MD PPRA, by order dated 15.12.2025, partially set aside the TEC and GRC decisions regarding certain items and directed reconstitution of the GRC with independent technical experts. Petitioner’s Argument: MD PPRA exceeded its statutory authority by interfering in technical decisions. Observations on lack of “scientific backing” were vague and unsupported. The reconstitution of the GRC violated Articles 4 and 10-A of the Constitution. Relied on precedent where courts declined interference in technical evaluations. PPRA / Respondent Argument: MD PPRA acted within statutory mandate. Intervention was procedural, remedial, and aimed at ensuring transparency, fairness, and technical competence. No technical evaluation was substituted; only the process was directed to be reconsidered by a reconstituted, independent GRC. ORDER; RAHEEL KAMRAN, J.: Through the instant petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (the “Constitution”), the petitioner calls in question the vires of order dated 15.12.2025 passed by the Managing Director, Punjab Public Procurement Regulatory Authority, Lahore (hereinafter to be referred as the “MD PPRA”). By virtue of the impugned order, seven representations including that filed by respondent No.6, were disposed of whereby the decisions of the Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) as well as Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC) constituted by the Procuring Agency i.e. Lahore General Hospital, Lahore were set aside to the extent of the items quoted by the complainants and the Procuring Agency was…