Judicial review in public tender awards is limited; absent arbitrariness or mala fides, the contract award stands.

Judicial review in public contract awards is confined to examining the legality of the decision-making process, and interference is justified only for illegality, irrationality, procedural impropriety, arbitrariness, mala fides or favouritism. A lowest bidder has no enforceable right to insist on award of the contract. Applying that standard, the Court found no legally sustainable ground to disturb the Port Trust's award, which was supported by the project authority and financial institution; re-bidding would have caused delay and cost escalation contrary to public interest. The High Court's interference was therefore unwarranted and the contract award was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the award of the contract and directing re-bidding in the absence of arbitrariness, mala fides or favouritism in the decision of the Port Trust.

Analysis: Judicial review in contractual matters is confined to testing the legality of the decision-making process. Interference is warranted only where the authority acts illegally, irrationally, in breach of natural justice, or in a manner that no reasonable authority would adopt. In tender matters, the lowest bidder does not acquire an enforceable right to the contract, and the Court should be slow to upset an award made in the context of a large public project unless the decision is shown to be vitiated by arbitrariness, collateral purpose, mala fides or favouritism. On the facts, the award in favour of the appellant was supported by the project authority and the financial institution, and no legally sustainable ground for judicial interference was made out. Re-bidding would also have caused delay and cost escalation detrimental to public interest.

Conclusion: The High Court's interference was unwarranted, and the award of contract in favour of the appellant was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: In matters of public contracts, judicial review is limited to illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety, and a court should not interfere with an award of contract absent arbitrariness, mala fides, favouritism or other abuse of power; a lowest bidder has no enforceable right to insist on award of the contract.

---