Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Sathish Kumar, M. Jothiraman, JJ
The Deputy Chief Signal and Telecommunication Engineer, Project Trichy, Southern Railway – Appellant
Versus
Texmaco Rail and Engineering Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ appeals challenging common order (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. rejection of bids due to technicalities (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. arguments for strict compliance with tender conditions (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. contentions by successful bidders against judicial interference (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. arguments for curable defects in technical bids (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. requirements for tender signing by authorized individuals (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 7. delegation of powers to committees under articles of association (Para 16 , 17) |
| 8. validity of resolutions under delegation of powers (Para 18 , 19) |
| 9. authority's discretion in seeking clarifications (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 10. judicial review of administrative actions (Para 23) |
| 11. arbitrary rejection of technical bids based on non-compliance (Para 25 , 26) |
| 12. final dismissal of writ appeals (Para 27) |
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)
All the Writ Appeals have been filed challenging the common order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD)Nos.5282 to 5285 of 2026, dated 04.03.2026.
2. Since the issue involved in all the Writ Appeals is one and the same, we are inclined to dispose of the same by a common judgment.
3. Writ Petiti
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
