Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : G.CHANDRAIAH
INFORMATICS (P) LTD. , HYDERABAD - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH - Respondent
Decided On : 01/28/2006
WP 13493 Of 2005
Professor John Daughman of University of Cambridge – Indian Intellectual Property – Article 226 – Procurement of State-wide Iris licenses – Non consideration of Bid - Petitioner-Company has approached this Court through its Chief executive Officer Dr. contends that he was a doctor and has specialization in M. R. C. S. Vascular Surgery from Royal College of Surgeons, had worked as Surgeon in one of the medical institutes petitioner-Company was a Limited Company, having its registered office in Hyderabad. According to the petitioner, the petitioner-Company is sole and authorized representative Technologies developed for commercial utilization software technology for Iris Recognition. Iris Recognition is considered to be the most accurate Biometric identifier holder of US and International patents behind Iris Recognition Technologies offers unparalleled security for public-use applications such as simplified passenger travel, border control, National ids restricted access and information access solutions detailed development of "iris recognition" has been mentioned in the petition and it is stated that Professor University of Cambridge, united Kingdom was the pioneer of the technology was awarded the patent for the Iris recognition –Held, judgment relied upon by the petitioner is Directorate of Education judgment also is not of any help to the petitioner judgment referred to the tata Cellular case (supra) and reproduced the principles deduced in that judgment -It will be profitable to reproduce these principles modern trend points to judicial restraint in administrative action. (2) The Court does not sit as a Court of appeal but merely reviews the manner in which the decision was made Court does not have the expertise to correct the administrative decision if a review of the administrative decision is permitted it will be substituting its own decision, without the necessary expertise which itself may be fallible - (4) The terms of the invitation to tender cannot be open to judicial scrutiny because the invitation to tender is in the realm of contract. Normally speaking, the decision to accept the tender or award the contract is reached by process of negotiations through several tiers. More often than not, such decisions are made qualitatively by experts. (5) The Government must have freedom of contract fair play in the joints is a necessary concomitant for an administrative body functioning in an administrative sphere or quasi-administrative sphere – Writ petition is dismissed.
( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-Company seeking a relief that the 4th respondents bid for procurement of State-wide Iris licenses, was incomplete and respondent nos. l to 3 should not consider his bid, as respondent No. 4 was unqualified.
( 2 ) THE petitioner-Company has approached this Court through its Chief executive Officer Dr. Srinivasa Rao, who has also filed affidavit in support of the writ petition. He contends that he was a doctor and has specialization in M. R. C. S. Vascular Surgery from Royal College of Surgeons, Edinborough, United Kingdom. He had worked as Surgeon in one of the medical institutes. The petitioner-Company was a Limited Company, having its registered office in Hyderabad. According to the petitioner, the petitioner-Company is sole and authorized representative of Iridian technologies, Inc. (Iridian) 1245 N Church street, Moorsetown, New Jersey, USA (hereinafter referred to as iridian technologies ). Iridian Technologies developed for commercial utilization software technology for Iris Recognition. Iris Recognition is considered to be the most accurate Biometric identifier. The holder of US and International patents behind Iris Recognition Technologies, iridian offers unparalleled security for public-use applications such as simplified passenger travel, border control, National ids, restricted access and information access solutions. A detailed development of "iris recognition" has been mentioned in the petition and it is stated that Professor dr. John Daugman, University of Cambridge, united Kingdom was the pioneer of the technology. In 1994, Dr. John Daugman was awarded the patent for the Iris recognition Algorithms. This is the Parent intellectual Property for all the products viz. , kno Who Authentication Server, Knowho oem SDK (Software Development Kit), pc Iris and Engine Access Control System of Iriscan. Dr. John Daugman, through an assignment deed dated 9. 9. 1993, conferred right, title and interest in and to the Biometric personal Identification System based on Iris analysis on Iriscan Inc. , upon the Delaware corporation. This Iris Authentication software Technologies developed by Iris scan in due course are as follows : kno Who Authentication Server, kno Who OEM SDK (Software Development kit), private ID in the year 2000, Iriscan merged with its licensee Sensar, Inc. Upon merger, the company came to be known as Iridian technologies Inc. As a result, Iridian technologies is the exclusive possessor and intellectual property patent holder of Iris licenses and Iris Equipment in the United states of America and International Patents. It is submitted that as on today, the Iridian technologies possess exclusive patent rights as regards the patents which are subject-matter of the writ petition and no one else can sell or use the technology/software and use licence except under a valid licence or contract from Iridian technologies. Through a business agreement dated 5. 2. 2004, writ petitioner was granted the status of an authorized agency to develop, represent and commercialise iridian Technologies Software in India. According to the petitioner, it has been the consistent stand of Iridian Technologies that the petitioner is the only Company in India to represent Iridian Technologies for its products, software and user licences etc. There had been a contract between Iridian technologies and LG Electronics, USA, for operation, distribution etc. The said business arrangement between Iridian technologies and LG Electronics, USA, had been validly cancelled on 23. 8. 2004 by iridian Technologies. The suit by LG electronics against the termination of contract, is subject-matter of a Suit in the District court, New Jersy in United States of america. No order has been passed against iridian Technologies, by the Court at United states. In view of the termination of the contract by Iridian Technologies, LG electronics, USA, is barred from conducting business in a
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
