Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

67. Two aspects evident from some of the successful challenges to arbitral awards made against public bodies may be dwelt upon; with a degree of trepidation, but in all honesty and sincerity. When an arbitral award in favour of a contractor and against a public body is perceived to be corrupt or improperly procured, whether in full or in part, the reasons proffered for setting aside the award or a part thereof perceived to be corrupt swing between the grounds of "in conflict with the public policy of India" and "patent illegality", but refer more to perversity and shocking to the conscience. Again, in all humility, the subjective perception may not always be reflected in the objective grounds indicated in support of the order upholding the challenge. Conversely, when an award appears to be just and fair, the challenge thereto is not always repelled with the degree of jurisprudential reasoning that the circumstances may demand. It is in such context that the parties here find the law in such regard as laid down in some of the judgments to be somewhat unclear and confusing. The perceived lack of clarity or confusion may be the shortfall in the objective reasoning matching up to the subjective perception. The other aspect of the matter is the somewhat misplaced loyalty, at times, of judges to public bodies in their otherwise salutary endeavour to protect public funds. Private contractors, oftentimes, find themselves on the leeward side of interpretation and as virtual pariahs, not necessarily because of the conduct of their character but merely for their status as private contractors.