Apollo Micro Systems Defence Tender Award Remains Intact After Court Ruling

Apollo Micro Systems Ltd said the Andhra Pradesh High Court rejected a competitor’s petition challenging its defence tender award.

The company stated that the tender remains valid, subject to standard pre-award verification under DRDO Procurement Manual, 2025.

Reader Takeaway: Court relief supports tender position; investors should track final contract verification.

What just happened

Apollo Micro Systems addressed media reports related to an Andhra Pradesh High Court judgment dated September 9, 2026, involving a writ petition filed by M/s Jaykay Enterprises Limited.

The petitioner had challenged the award of a defence contract to Apollo Micro Systems as the L-1 bidder and sought cancellation of the tender and disqualification of bidders.

Apollo Micro Systems said the High Court rejected the petition and found no merit in allegations of lapse, fault, mala fide intent or arbitrariness against the company or the procuring authorities.

Why this matters

The company’s L-1 position in the defence tender continues to stand after the court proceedings. The procuring authorities involved included the Union government, Defence Research and Development Organisation and Naval Science and Technological Laboratory.

The company also clarified that the reported “₹1 bid” reference appearing in media coverage was not part of the court judgment and was unrelated to the company or the tender under discussion.

What changes now

The tender award remains subject to the regular pre-award verification process under the DRDO Procurement Manual, 2025.

Apollo Micro Systems said its competitive pricing was supported by its existing Underwater Mine technology, PBMM-NG, which it developed earlier on a No Commitment-No Cost basis, reducing additional development requirements.

What to track next

Investors will watch the completion of the verification process and any further disclosures related to the defence contract execution.

The company’s clarification aims to address concerns created by media reports surrounding the tender dispute and reinforces its position that the court ruling did not impact the award.