SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
Shiv Shakthi Dal Industries, Represented By Its Prop. Sri Vishwanath B. Patil, S/o. Basavaraj Patil – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka, Represented By Its Secretary To Backward Class Welfare Department – Respondent
ORDER :
(Suraj Govindaraj, J.)
A. Prayers
1. The Petitioner in W.P.No.202094/2024 is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
ii. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ of like nature and direct the respondents to call for the fresh tender either taluka wise or not to insist upon financial conditions and,
iii. Grant any other remedy that this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. The Petitioner in W.P.No.201984/2024 is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
b. Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other writ of like nature and quash the tender bearing No. BWCDY/Account.Food Tender/CR/2024-25 dated 25.07.2024 invited by the respondent No.5 vide Anenxure-F1 to the writ petition.
c. Issue writ of Mandamus or any
Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. vs Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. & Anr., (2016) 16 SCC 818
Air India Ltd. vs Cochin International Airport Ltd. & Ors., (2000) 2 SCC 617
Arun Kumar Agarwal vs Union of India, (2013) 7 SCC 1
Association of Registration Plates vs Union of India & Ors., (2005) 1 SCC 679
B.S.N. Joshi & Sons Ltd. vs Nair Coal Services Ltd & Ors., (2006) 11 SCC 548
BALCO Employees Union vs Union of India, (2002) 2 SCC 333
Dhampur Sugars (Kashipur) vs State of Uttranchal, (2007) 8 SCC 418
Federation of Railway Officers Association vs Union of India, (2003) 4 SCC 289
Meerut Development Authority vs. Association of Management Studies and Another
Michigan Rubber (India) Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka & Ors., (2012) 8 SCC 216
Montecarlo Ltd. vs NTPC Ltd., (2016) 15 SCC 272
National High Speed Rail Corpn. Ltd. vs Montecarlo Ltd. and Ors., (2022) 6 SCC 401
Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Ltd. vs RBI, (1992) 2 SCC 343
PTR Exports vs Union of India, (1996) 5 SCC 268
Silppi Constructions Contractors vs Union of India, (2020) 16 SCC 489
Judicial review of tender conditions is limited; courts should not interfere unless actions are arbitrary, discriminatory, or mala fide, ensuring public interest is prioritized.
Point of law: powers of judicial review are limited and while exercising such power the Court has to see whether the process adopted or decision made by the authority is malafideor is intended to fav....
The formulation of tender conditions falls within the administrative domain of the authority, and judicial review is limited to preventing arbitrariness or favoritism. The courts cannot interfere wit....
The court affirmed that stringent eligibility criteria in public tender processes cannot violate statutory relaxations for Start-ups, emphasizing limited grounds for judicial review.
The participation in a tender process waives the right to subsequently challenge its conditions unless proven arbitrary or illegal.
Judicial review in public procurement is limited; courts refrain from interference unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or bad faith is established.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limitation of judicial review in tender matters, the need for commercial prudence in evaluating tenders, and the importance of fairness and non....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.