T.Lakshmipathi & Ors vs P.Nithyananda Reddy & Ors on 31 March, 2003
6. In the instant case, the Deputy Commissioner
even before the financial bid of petitioner could be
opened, has opined that since there is only one person
remaining in the fray, namely, petitioner, has directed
the Tender Inviting Authority to call for fresh tenders.
This process adopted by the respondent No.4, Deputy
Commissioner, cannot be found fault with as said
decision of 4th respondent is in consonance with the
-9-
letter and spirit of extant circulars. Merely because
under certain circumstances the authorities, either the
Tender Inviting Authority or authority superior to the
Tender Inviting Authority had earlier exercised their
discretion to accept single bid or assuming for a
moment that such irregularity or illegality committed by
said authorities on earlier occasions, would not give any
right to the petitioner to contend that similar
irregularity or illegality is required to perpetrated or
examined in his favour. There cannot be any concept of
negative equality and for this proposition, the judgment
of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA
& ANR. VS. INTERNATIONAL TRADING CO. & ANR. reported
in AIR 2003 SC 3983, can be looked up. The Hon'ble
Apex Court has held that a party cannot strengthen its
case on the concept of negative equality. It has further
held as under: