Scribd
Upload
102 views1 page

Case Note

Uploaded by

Lavkesh Bhambhani
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
102 views1 page

Case Note

Uploaded by

Lavkesh Bhambhani
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

CASE NOTES

S.NO. PARTICULARS PG.NO.


A. Guidelines for deciding bids government tenders:
1. Nandhini Delux, Bangalore v Government of A.P. and another [ 2005 SCC
OnLine AP 933]
@Para 31: the court relying on the judgment of Air India Limited v Cochin
International Airport Limited, (2000) 2 SCC 617 observed that the state can
choose its own method while inviting tenders and to arrive at a decision thereof, the
same is not open to judicial scrutiny. Price need not the sole criterion always and the
state is free to grant to any relaxation if the tender conditions permit such a
relaxation. Judicial Review under Article 226 if the decision making process of state
and its instrumentalities is found to be vitiated by malafides, unreasonableness and
arbitrariness. Judicial review under Article 226 should be exercised with great caution
and only in the interest of public interest.
@Para 32: the settled principle that the state cannot deviate from norms, standards
and procedures laid down by them and depart from them arbitrarily and if the govt.
ignoring preconditions of eligibility, the same amounts to arbitrariness under Article
14. Also, if the concerned authority fails to understand the difference between
essential conditionalties and desirable qualifications or subsidiary qualification, the
same would be arbitrary. And lastly, if at the stage of evaluation the tender authority
introduces extraneous element, the same would amount to legal malice.
@Para 33: the question relating to whether the allocation of marks by the tender
committee is rational and unarbitrary would depend upon the decision making
process rather than the decision itself.
@Para 34: where along with essential qualifications some additional conditions are
also provided then in the event of two persons achieving a similar bench mark, the
person with the additional qualifications ought to be preferred.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy