Afcons Infrastructure Ltd vs Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. & Anr on 15 September, 2016
In view of the principles of law laid down by the
apex Court, as discussed above, it is made clear that the
apex Court has time and again put restriction with regard
to the interpretation given to the conditions of tender
document and, as such, it has been held that unless
there is mala fide or perversity in the understanding or
appreciation or the application of terms and conditions of
the tender documents, the constitutional Courts should
not interfere with the interpretation given to such tender
documents. The apex Court has given a caution with
regard to exercise of the power of judicial review and laid
down the law stating that exercise of power of judicial
review would be called for if the approach is arbitrary or
mala fide or procedure adopted is meant to favour one.
The decision making process should clearly show that the
said maladies are kept at bay. But where a decision is
taken by the Tendering Authority, which is manifestly in
consonance with the language of the tender document or
Page 31 of 37
subserves the purpose for which the tender is floated, the
Court should follow the principle of restraint. More so, the
Tendering Authority, who is the author of the tender
document, is competent person to interpret the conditions
of the tender document and, as such, the Constitutional
Court should not interfere with the interpretation given by
the Tendering Authority.