Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S.K.SAHOO, SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Attal Plastics – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. failure to provide contract documents led to bid rejection. (Para 2 , 3 , 5) |
| 2. pending representation may affect future bidding ability. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 3. judicial restraint in administrative tender decisions. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. justified rejection of bid due to non-compliance. (Para 11) |
| 5. writ petition dismissed, no merit found. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
ORDER :
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
2. On the last date i.e. 14.07.2025, Mr. B.P. Tripathy, learned Senior Advocate appearing for opp. party nos.2 & 3 produced the copies of the relevant contracts executed by the petitioner for the financial years 2021-22 and 2022-23 along with the bid documents, which was filed by the petitioner along with the bid and further stated he has received written instruction that the petitioner, the bidder has failed to supply the relevant contract document in support of the supply contract for the financial year 2023-24 and the petitioner has only furnished the copies of invoices against supply of non- woven bags to private limited and public unlisted companies, which does not meet the requirements of Clause-18.8 of the
Judicial restraint in reviewing tender processes; courts should not substitute administrative decisions unless shown to be arbitrary or unreasonable.
Courts should exercise restraint in contractual matters, refraining from meddling unless there's clear evidence of arbitrariness or mala fides.
The court reaffirmed that judicial review in tender matters is limited to ensuring no arbitrariness or illegality and emphasized the importance of fairness in the bidding process.
Judicial review in contractual matters requires courts to exercise restraint and intervene only in cases of clear arbitrariness or bias, respecting the expertise of public sector undertakings.
The interpretation of eligibility criteria in public tenders is best determined by the tendering authority, and judicial review is limited to preventing arbitrariness or mala fides.
District Collector is not empowered to consider the aspect of alteration of any route or alignment except to remove difficulties faced by the licensee. As a result of this, even the request of altern....
The judgment emphasizes the limited scope of judicial review in contractual matters and the importance of fair play in the decision-making process. It highlights the freedom of the respondents to awa....
Judicial review in public procurement is limited; courts refrain from interference unless clear evidence of arbitrariness or bad faith is established.
Point of Law : Tender - Non-completion of contract - Courts would interfere with administrative policy decision only if it is arbitrary, discriminatory, malafide or actuated by bias. It is entitled t....
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
