Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (0.47 seconds)

Raunaq International Ltd vs I.V R. Construction Ltd. And Ors on 9 December, 1998

29. In our opinion, none of these decisions are apposite. In Ramana Dayaram Shetty, the bid of one ineligible person was entertained while that of another ineligible person was not entertained. The Supreme Court held this to be discriminatory and arbitrary. In Raunaq International, the bid of both ineligible persons was entertained. In the writ petition that we are concerned with, there is no question about either Tata Power being ineligible or Reliance Power being ineligible. Admittedly, both are eligible and their bids were WP (C) No.62/2009 Page 21 of 28 entertained and neither one of them has made a grievance in this regard. That apart, the two decisions referred to above show that as long as the playing field remains level for all the bidders or putative bidders, no one can make an allegation of discrimination or arbitrariness.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 782 - S V Manohar - Full Document
1