K.M.Mustafa vs The Indian Railway Catering And on 30 May, 2018
11.Reiterating the submissions made in the counter affidavit
filed on behalf of the third respondent in W.P.No.13265 of 2018, the
learned counsel for the third respondent has submitted that no special
consideration has been shown to the third respondent relaxing any
http://www.judis.nic.inguidelines stipulated in the tender process, rather the third respondent
got qualified only upon following the conditions stipulated in the tender
10
scrupulously. Stating so, he submitted that the impugned
communications need not be interfered with by this Court. The learned
counsel relied upon the decision of this Court in Hero Ecotech Ltd. v.
Commissioner of Backward Classes Welfare, reported in 2018 (4) CTC
47, to state that the scope for interference in commercial contractual
matters is very limited and that interference can be done only if there
is any error in decision making process, and not in the decision itself;
the bidder must comply in full the technical specifications, being a
tender requirement.