Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Nagesh Bheemapaka, J
Spm India Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of dispute regarding tender conditions for ficv suspension systems. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. parties' contentions on mandatory compliance with bid submission and gem portal constraints. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. summary of rival arguments regarding tender rejection and scope of judicial review. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. interpretation of mandatory tender conditions and consequences of non-compliance. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. application of judicial restraint in commercial matters and legitimacy of re-tender decisions. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
O R D E R:
Heard Sri Ch. Pushyam Kiran, learned counsel for Petitioner, Sri B. Narsimha Sharma, learned Additional Solicitor General on behalf of Respondent No.1 and Sri Pramod Singh, learned counsel for Respondents 2 and 3 and perused the record.
2. Petitioner, has originally prayed for the following relief:
" to issue a writ, direction or order especially in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring that the action of Respondents No. 2 and 3 in rejecting the Petitioner's bid for the Tender for Procurement of Suspension System for FICV (Tr.) as per specification no: 98002/OFMK/R&D/FICV
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
