Horticulture Service – Manpower Based Model: GeM business opportunity

Who buys Horticulture Service – Manpower Based Model on GeM, in which states, how many sellers compete and what wins. Change the filters to match your business.

Live bids: 2Awarded results: 0Live tenders →

Live bids + bids closed 2025-11-07 – 2026-11-07 (365 days). Includes imported GeM history.

Live bids: 2
Closed in period: 55
Awarded results: 0
Median winning price (L1): —
Avg bidders per bid: —

Tenders published per month

Last 12 months, matching your filters

0 Dec 2025

0 Jan 2026

0 Feb 2026

3 Mar 2026

6 Apr 2026

1111 May 2026

7 Jun 2026

5 Jul 2026

8 Aug 2026

9 Sept 2026

8 Oct 2026

0 Nov 2026

Show as table

Month	Tenders
Dec 2025	0
Jan 2026	0
Feb 2026	0
Mar 2026	3
Apr 2026	6
May 2026	11
Jun 2026	7
Jul 2026	5
Aug 2026	8
Sept 2026	9
Oct 2026	8
Nov 2026	0

How open are these bids?

No EMD needed: 13%
MSE turnover/experience relaxed: —
Reverse auction: 0%

Turnover, experience, EMD and exemptions come from bid documents and are still sparse; every share shows how many bids it is based on. Results improve as more history is imported.

Top 10: where to work

Ranked by opportunity score (0–100). Open a row to see why.

1
Horticulture Service – Manpower Based Model73/100
2 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
100
Momentum
50
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
2
Horticulture Service - Lumpsum based33/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
27
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50

Show as table

Rank	Name	Score	Live bids	Closed in period	Avg bidders per bid	Median winning price (L1)
1	Horticulture Service – Manpower Based Model	73	2	55	—	—
2	Horticulture Service - Lumpsum based	33	0	2	—	—

Fewest bidders per bid, then relaxed criteria

1
Horticulture Service – Manpower Based Model100/100
2 live · ranked by bid criteria (no results yet)
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
100
Momentum
50
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50

Show as table

Rank	Name	Score	Live bids	Closed in period	Avg bidders per bid	Median winning price (L1)
1	Horticulture Service – Manpower Based Model	100	2	55	—	—

1
Department of Defence77/100
Ministry of Defence ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
100
Momentum
71
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
2
Higher Education Department Uttar Pradesh71/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
63
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
3
Balmer Lawrie and Company Limited60/100
Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas ·1 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
50
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
4
Department of Higher Education59/100
Ministry of Education ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
89
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
5
Department of Sports57/100
Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
82
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
6
Department of Electronics and Information Technology54/100
Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
73
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
7
Department of Agricultural Research and Education (dare)54/100
Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare ·1 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
32
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
8
Department of School Education and Literacy54/100
Ministry of Education ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
32
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
9
Department of Financial Services51/100
Ministry of Finance ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
63
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
10
Department of Consumer Affairs40/100
Ministry of Consumer Affairs Food and Public Distribution ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
50
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50

Show as table

Rank	Name	Score	Live bids	Closed in period	Avg bidders per bid	Median winning price (L1)
1	Department of Defence	77	0	8	—	—
2	Higher Education Department Uttar Pradesh	71	0	3	—	—
3	Balmer Lawrie and Company Limited	60	1	1	—	—
4	Department of Higher Education	59	0	6	—	—
5	Department of Sports	57	0	5	—	—
6	Department of Electronics and Information Technology	54	0	4	—	—
7	Department of Agricultural Research and Education (dare)	54	1	0	—	—
8	Department of School Education and Literacy	54	0	1	—	—
9	Department of Financial Services	51	0	3	—	—
10	Department of Consumer Affairs	40	0	2	—	—

1
Ministry of Education76/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
90
Momentum
81
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
2
Ministry of Defence75/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
100
Momentum
63
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
3
Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas59/100
1 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
48
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
4
Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports56/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
78
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
5
Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare54/100
1 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
30
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
6
Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology53/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
70
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
7
Ministry of Finance51/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
60
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
8
Ministry of Power39/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
48
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
9
Ministry of Consumer Affairs Food and Public Distribution39/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
48
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
10
Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers39/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
48
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50

Show as table

Rank	Name	Score	Live bids	Closed in period	Avg bidders per bid	Median winning price (L1)
1	Ministry of Education	76	0	7	—	—
2	Ministry of Defence	75	0	9	—	—
3	Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas	59	1	1	—	—
4	Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports	56	0	5	—	—
5	Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare	54	1	0	—	—
6	Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology	53	0	4	—	—
7	Ministry of Finance	51	0	3	—	—
8	Ministry of Power	39	0	2	—	—
9	Ministry of Consumer Affairs Food and Public Distribution	39	0	2	—	—
10	Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers	39	0	2	—	—

1
Uttar Pradesh70/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
100
Momentum
36
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
2
Madhya Pradesh70/100
1 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
57
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
3
Jammu & Kashmir60/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
49
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
4
Andaman & Nicobar57/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
39
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
5
Tamil Nadu57/100
1 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
39
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
6
Delhi51/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
63
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
7
Punjab51/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
63
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
8
Gujarat50/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
57
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
9
Maharashtra47/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
49
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
10
Telangana47/100
0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
49
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50

Show as table

Rank	Name	Score	Live bids	Closed in period	Avg bidders per bid	Median winning price (L1)
1	Uttar Pradesh	70	0	16	—	—
2	Madhya Pradesh	70	1	3	—	—
3	Jammu & Kashmir	60	0	3	—	—
4	Andaman & Nicobar	57	0	2	—	—
5	Tamil Nadu	57	1	1	—	—
6	Delhi	51	0	5	—	—
7	Punjab	51	0	5	—	—
8	Gujarat	50	0	4	—	—
9	Maharashtra	47	0	3	—	—
10	Telangana	47	0	3	—	—

1
Lucknow77/100
Uttar Pradesh ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
100
Momentum
71
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
2
Bhopal71/100
Madhya Pradesh ·1 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
63
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
3
South Andaman60/100
Andaman & Nicobar ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
50
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
4
Tiruvallur60/100
Tamil Nadu ·1 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
50
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
5
Ananthnag54/100
Jammu & Kashmir ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
32
Momentum
100
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
6
Mohali51/100
Punjab ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
63
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
7
Hyderabad51/100
Telangana ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
63
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria
100
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
8
Raipur40/100
Chhattisgarh ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
50
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
9
Central Delhi40/100
Delhi ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
50
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50
10
South West Delhi40/100
Delhi ·0 live
Live tenders →Create alert
Why this score
Volume
50
Momentum
0
Low competition (not enough data, neutral)
50
Easy criteria (not enough data, neutral)
50
Order value (not enough data, neutral)
50

Show as table

Rank	Name	Score	Live bids	Closed in period	Avg bidders per bid	Median winning price (L1)
1	Lucknow	77	0	8	—	—
2	Bhopal	71	1	2	—	—
3	South Andaman	60	0	2	—	—
4	Tiruvallur	60	1	1	—	—
5	Ananthnag	54	0	1	—	—
6	Mohali	51	0	3	—	—
7	Hyderabad	51	0	3	—	—
8	Raipur	40	0	2	—	—
9	Central Delhi	40	0	2	—	—
10	South West Delhi	40	0	2	—	—

How the opportunity score works

Score = Volume 30% + Momentum 20% + Low competition 25% + Easy criteria 15% + Order value 10%. Each part is 0–100; a part without enough data counts as a neutral 50.

Volume: tenders in the period, compared with the biggest row of the list.
Momentum: share published in the last 30 days vs the average (100 = twice as fast).
Low competition: 2 bidders per bid = 100, 15 or more = 0.
Easy criteria: share of read bid documents with no EMD, an MSE/startup exemption or no turnover/experience criterion.
Order value: median winning (L1) price, compared with the highest in the list.

Who wins these bids

Top L1 sellers in awarded bids of the period

No awarded results for these filters yet.

AI business advisor

Get a short plan from these numbers: where to start, whom to sell to, what to prepare and the risks.

Horticulture Service – Manpower Based Model: GeM business opportunity

What can you do?

Tenders published per month

How open are these bids?

Top 10: where to work

Who wins these bids

AI business advisor