https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193839 The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, dismissing the appeal as the appellant failed to meet the Qualification Requirements (QR) by not providing evidence of drilling for blasting purposes, as specifically required. The Court emphasized the importance of allowing technical experts to assess bids and exercised judicial restraint in reviewing administrative decisions in tender processes, finding no procedural unfairness or arbitrariness in the respondent-owner's evaluation. en-us Tue, 18 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Sep 2017 18:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193839 The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, dismissing the appeal as the appellant failed to meet the Qualification Requirements (QR) by not providing evidence of drilling for blasting purposes, as specifically required. The Court emphasized the importance of allowing technical experts to assess bids and exercised judicial restraint in reviewing administrative decisions in tender processes, finding no procedural unfairness or arbitrariness in the respondent-owner's evaluation. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 18 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193839