https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171898 The court dismissed the petitioners' claims challenging the rejection of their tender for a contract to print telephone directories. The court held that the rejection was not arbitrary or capricious, emphasizing the importance of eligibility criteria and experience in awarding such contracts. It was ruled that the shareholders' experience could not be attributed to the company, and piercing the corporate veil was not warranted. The court prioritized public interest in ensuring timely delivery of directories over revenue considerations, ultimately upholding the rejection of the petitioners' tender. en-us Fri, 15 Oct 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Aug 2015 13:00:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171898 The court dismissed the petitioners' claims challenging the rejection of their tender for a contract to print telephone directories. The court held that the rejection was not arbitrary or capricious, emphasizing the importance of eligibility criteria and experience in awarding such contracts. It was ruled that the shareholders' experience could not be attributed to the company, and piercing the corporate veil was not warranted. The court prioritized public interest in ensuring timely delivery of directories over revenue considerations, ultimately upholding the rejection of the petitioners' tender. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 15 Oct 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171898