Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.28 seconds)
M/S Jagdamba Building Contractor vs Employees State Insurance Corporation ... on 29 July, 2020 cites

M/S Master Marine Services Pvt. Ltd vs Metcalfe & Hodgkinson Pvt. Ltd. & Anr on 19 April, 2005

Thus, before we record our conclusion we may touch upon the scope and extent of interference in the administrative decision by this Court in exercise of power of judicial review. Supreme Court in Master Marine Services (P) Ltd. v. Metcalfe & Hodgkinson (P) Ltd. and Anr. (2005) 6 SCC 138 in para (12) held "after an exhaustive consideration of a large 11 of 14 ::: Downloaded on - 06-09-2020 05:53:57 ::: CWP No.8415 of 2020 12 number of decisions and standard books on administrative law, the Court enunciated the principle that the modern trend points to judicial restraint in administrative action. The Court does not sit as a court of appeal but merely reviews the manner in which the decision was made. The court does not have the expertise to correct the administrative decision. If a review of the administrative decision is permitted it will be substituting its own decision, without the necessary expertise, which itself may be fallible. The Government must have freedom of contract. In other words, fair play in the joints is a necessary concomitant for an administrative body functioning in an administrative sphere or quasi- administrative sphere. However, the decision must not only be tested by the application of Wednesbury principles of reasonableness but also must be free from arbitrariness not affected by bias or actuated by mala fides."
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 388 - G P Mathur - Full Document

South Delhi Municipal Corp vs Ravinder Kumar & Ors on 7 October, 2015

In South Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs. Ravinder Kumar & Anr. (2015) 15 SCC 545, it was concluded: "For the reasons stated above, the High Court has failed to see that the appellant-Corporation adopted a fair and transparent method by inviting the bids for the re- tender notice issued by it. The High Court has not found any malafide intention on the part of appellant-Corporation in inviting the fresh bids after taking the decision to cancel its earlier tender notice. The appellant-Corporation, being the custodian of public finance, took its decision objectively with a bonafide intention to serve the best interest of the public in general. Thus, for the foregoing reasons, the appellant- Corporation has not committed any wrong in cancelling its earlier 12 of 14 ::: Downloaded on - 06-09-2020 05:53:57 ::: CWP No.8415 of 2020 13 tender notice and issuing subsequent tender notice afresh inviting bids from the eligible contractors."
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 27 - V G Gowda - Full Document

Municipal Corporation vs Bvg India Limited on 27 March, 2018

Likewise, in Municipal Corporation, Ujjain & Anr. Vs. BVG India Limited and Ors. 2018(5) SCC 462, the Supreme Court in paragraph 10 its judgment observed "the judicial review of administrative action is intended to prevent arbitrariness. The purpose of judicial review of administrative action is to check whether the choice or decision is made lawfully and not to check whether the choice or decision is sound. If the process adopted or decision made by the authority is not mala fide and not intended to favour someone; if the process adopted or decision made is neither so arbitrary nor irrational that under the facts of the case it can be concluded that no responsible authority acting reasonably and in accordance with relevant law could have reached such a decision. And if the public interest is not affected, there should be no interference under Article 226."
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 142 - M M Shantanagoudar - Full Document
1