https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463162 The HC held that the petitioner JV ceased to exist upon withdrawal of one partner, rendering it ineligible to be awarded the contracts for packages 90, 91, and 98 despite being the lowest bidder. The JV agreement and tender conditions required both partners to jointly fulfill obligations and meet qualification criteria, which the remaining partner alone could not satisfy. The Court found no illegality in the Government's rejection of the petitioner's bids on grounds of non-existence of the JV. Given the substantial price difference between the petitioner's bids and the next lowest tenders, the Court directed fresh tenders for the packages to protect public interest. The writ petition was dismissed without costs, and no mandamus was issued to compel the Government to accept the petitioner's bids. en-us Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Aug 2025 15:26:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463162 The HC held that the petitioner JV ceased to exist upon withdrawal of one partner, rendering it ineligible to be awarded the contracts for packages 90, 91, and 98 despite being the lowest bidder. The JV agreement and tender conditions required both partners to jointly fulfill obligations and meet qualification criteria, which the remaining partner alone could not satisfy. The Court found no illegality in the Government's rejection of the petitioner's bids on grounds of non-existence of the JV. Given the substantial price difference between the petitioner's bids and the next lowest tenders, the Court directed fresh tenders for the packages to protect public interest. The writ petition was dismissed without costs, and no mandamus was issued to compel the Government to accept the petitioner's bids. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463162