Rule 1 of the GFR states that the GFR shall be applicable to (a) all Ministries and Departments of the Central Government, attached and subordinate bodies, and (b) autonomous bodies, except in those cases where the by-laws of an autonomous body provide for separate financial rules which have been approved by the Government.

Any private entity participating in the competitive bidding or public procurement process to supply goods or services, or for that matter being awarded a project or contract by a government agency, will be covered by the law insofar as the bidding, qualification and award/rejection is subject to judicial review under well established common law principles of fair play and reasonableness (such as the principle of legitimate expectation, pacta sunt servanda, Wednesbury's reasonableness and proportionality, as have been incorporated into Indian law by the courts). Private entities claiming a wrongful denial have a right to seek redress through the courts of law.

There are no such exemptions contemplated under the GFR.

The regulatory framework of the public procurement system is applicable to all types of contracts entered into by Ministries and Departments of the Government for the procurement of goods and services.

Rules 225 (xiv) of the GFR states that the terms of a contract, including the scope and specification once entered into, should not be materially varied.

1. Wherever material variation in any of the terms or conditions in a contract becomes unavoidable, the financial and other effects involved should be examined and recorded, and specific approval of the authority competent to approve the revised financial and other commitments obtained, before varying the conditions.
2. All such changes should be in the form of an amendment to the contract duly signed by all parties to the contract.

Further, Rules 225 (xv) states that normally, no extensions of the scheduled delivery or completion dates should be granted except where events constituting force majeure, as provided in the contract, have occurred or the terms and conditions include such a provision for other reasons. Extensions as provided in the contract may be allowed through formal amendments to the contract duly signed by parties to the contract.

The GFR does not lay down any specific requirements with regard to framework agreements.

There is no single framework law or regulation specifically for public private partnerships. However, model bidding documents (including the request for qualifications, request for proposals, and concession agreements) have been issued by various public authorities (such as the National Highways Authority of India, Planning Commission, etc.) for the procurement and implementation of public private partnerships. 

Further, public private partnerships are often subject to sectoral laws and underlying sectoral policies. Within this framework, various governmental instrumentalities and agencies, including ministries and departments (such as the Public Works Department, the National Highways Authority of India), have evolved their own system for entering into public private partnerships.

See the response to (g) above.

The Income Tax Act, 1961, contains rules for avoidance of tax on the transfer of goods and services between associated and connected enterprises. These rules are all encompassing and also apply to contracts for public procurement. Further, certain Government instrumentalities and agencies, including ministries and departments (like the Ministry of Defence, the Public Works Department, the National Highways Authority of India, et al), have evolved their own public procurement system in which such rules are found. 

The Competition Act, 2002 prohibits any agreement which causes, or is likely to cause, appreciable adverse effect on competition in markets in India. Such agreements are void. Any agreement which evidences bid rigging or collusive bidding that shall be presumed to have an appreciable adverse effect on competition under Section 3 of the Competition Act. The Competition Commission of India may inquire into any alleged contravention of Section 3. The CCI, on being satisfied that there exists a prima facie case of bid rigging, shall direct the Director General to cause an investigation and furnish a report. Post inquiry, the Competition Commission of India can pass such orders and impose such penalty as it deems fit.