Judicial review – When can a Constitutional Court interfere with the decision of the allotment of retail outlets made by Public Sector Undertaking:
Held: The Court shall interfere with the decision of allotment of dealership when the Corporation (PSU) shows outright favor to the appellant – Once the PSU was convinced with the entire procedure undertaken by the appellant, the Constitutional Courts have no business interfering with the allotment – Power of judicial review would be called for if the approach of the PSU is arbitrary or mala fide or procedure adopted is meant to favor one of the applicants – The decision-making process should clearly show that the said maladies are kept at bay. [Paras 22-23, 25] Tenders – When should a Constitutional Court exercise Judicial Restraint with regard to the decision of PSU Corporations granting it:
Held: The PSU that authors the tender documents is the best person to understand and appreciate its requirements and interpret its documents and therefore, the constitutional courts must defer to this understanding and appreciation of the tender documents, unless there is mala fide or perversity in the understanding or appreciation or in the application of the terms of the tender conditions – For the mere reason that the PSU has given an interpretation to the tender documents that is not acceptable to the constitutional courts it cannot be a reason to interfere with the interpretation – Where a decision is taken that is manifestly in consonance with the language of the tender document or subserves the purpose for which the tender is floated, the court should follow the principle of restraint and technical evaluation or comparison by the court would be impermissible – The principle that is applied to scan and understand an ordinary instrument relatable to contract in other spheres has to be treated differently than interpreting and appreciating tender documents relating to technical works and projects requiring special skills – The owner should be allowed to carry out the purpose and there has to be allowance of free play in the joints. [Para 25]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.