The Supreme Court ruled on 6 October 2025 that tender conditions requiring prior supply experience **within a specific state** are unconstitutional. In *Vinishma Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Chhattisgarh*, the Court struck down the rule for violating **Article 14** (equality) and **Article 19(1)(g)** (freedom of trade), stressing that public procurement must ensure fair competition and a “level playing field.” Geographical restrictions lacking rational justification were deemed arbitrary. The decision reinforces that tender rules must serve legitimate objectives, not create artificial barriers favoring local suppliers over qualified national bidders.
The Madras High Court condemned the seven-year closure of the Arulmighu Mariamman Temple in Karur, calling it a “dereliction of constitutional duty.” The temple had been shut due to caste tensions, denying Scheduled Caste devotees access. Justice B. Pugalendhi ruled that citing law and order concerns cannot justify violating Articles 14 and 25, which guarantee equality and religious freedom. The court criticized police and district officials for failing to find constitutional solutions and directed the HR&CE Department to act under Section 64 to ensure fair access. It warned that caste-based denial of entry would invite strict legal action.
