https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299383 Government procurement under the Swiss Challenge Method was upheld where the procedure was expressly disclosed in the public notice and bid documents, applied on a pilot basis, and adopted after consideration by the competent authorities for public-private development of undeveloped land. The court found no arbitrariness, unreasonableness, or violation of Article 14 because all participants knew the first right of refusal and the process aimed at securing value and better housing development. Allegations of favouritism or improper executive influence also failed because the proposal was examined through the departmental process, there was application of mind, and no binding direction to confer an undue benefit was shown. Judicial interference in such policy-based contractual matters was therefore unwarranted. en-us Mon, 11 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Jun 2025 10:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299383 Government procurement under the Swiss Challenge Method was upheld where the procedure was expressly disclosed in the public notice and bid documents, applied on a pilot basis, and adopted after consideration by the competent authorities for public-private development of undeveloped land. The court found no arbitrariness, unreasonableness, or violation of Article 14 because all participants knew the first right of refusal and the process aimed at securing value and better housing development. Allegations of favouritism or improper executive influence also failed because the proposal was examined through the departmental process, there was application of mind, and no binding direction to confer an undue benefit was shown. Judicial interference in such policy-based contractual matters was therefore unwarranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 11 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299383