Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.36 seconds)
Axiscades Aerospace And Technologies ... vs Union Of India & Ors on 29 May, 2018 cites

Era Infra Engineering Limited vs Delhi Development Authority & Anr on 8 January, 2010

33. In the present case, the Petitioner‟s petition premised on its contention that it is the lowest bidder and therefore the Union MoD, should be directed to enter into a contract with it. This court is of the view however, that it is a settled principle of law that no vested right accrues on the lowest bidder and the government has the right to withdraw the bid with valid reasons. The Respondent has relied on the case of Era Infra Engineering v. DDA & Ann- 166 (Supra) in its submissions to support this argument.
Delhi High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 6 - B D Ahmed - Full Document

Tata Cellular vs Union Of India on 26 July, 1994

In administrative matters, the scope of judicial review is limited and the judiciary must exercise judicial restrained in such matters, as held by this Court in Tata Cellular v. Union of India: AIR 1996 SC 11: (1994) 6 SCC 651. Moreover, the view of Prasar Bharti also appears reasonable because Prasar Bharti has to pay the amount inclusive of sales tax, since there is no concessional forms. If Prasar Bharti has taken up one possible interpretation, the High Court should not have intervened. The scope of judicial review in administrative matters is limited."
Supreme Court of India Cites 33 - Cited by 3275 - S Mohan - Full Document

Montecarlo Ltd vs Ntpc Ltd on 18 October, 2016

30. On reading of the above judgments, it is clear that the courts can review a tender process or tender stipulation, on grounds of proven procedural irregularity. In judicial review, a court under Article 226 of the Constitution reviews the decision-making process, its legality and procedural regularity and not the merits of the decision of the executive agency. The principal decision maker is the administrative or public agency. This was again held, in Montecarlo Ltd. v National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd 2016 (15) SCC 272:
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 201 - D Misra - Full Document

Central Coalfieds Limited vs Sll-Sml (Joint Venture Consortium) . on 17 August, 2016

31. Central Coalfields Limited and Ors. V. SLL-SML (Joint Venture Consortium) and Ors. AIR 2016 SC 3814 ruled that a court before interfering in tender or contractual matters in exercise of power of judicial review, the court considers whether the decision (to award contract, or not to award the contract) is to consider whether the decision was W.P.(C) 856/2017 Page 14 of 17 actuated by malafide, whether the process adopted was arbitrary and irrational, and whether the public interest is affected; if the answers are in the negative, there should be no interference in the decision by the court.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 9 - Cited by 360 - M B Lokur - Full Document

Bakshi Security And Personnel Services ... vs Devkishan Computed Pvt Ltd And Ors on 26 July, 2016

The limited scope of judicial review in public contractual matters was recapitulated time and again, and was emphasised recently in Bakshi Security and Personnel Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Devikishan Computed Pvt. Ltd. and Ors., AIR 2016 SC 3585. In that case, it was stated that the court should not interfere at the insistence of the unsuccessful bidder in respect of a procedural violation in the following words:
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 164 - R F Nariman - Full Document
1   2 Next