https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464398 SC allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court's directions, holding the impugned bid invalid and not entitled to consideration. The Court accepted NIC's affidavit that bid retrieval from the e-portal was not feasible, rejected the respondent's consultant opinion and assertions of retrieval, and found the respondent failed to obtain timely acknowledgement while other bidders did. The High Court's order effectively gave the respondent a second opportunity, which SC ruled cannot be countenanced, and therefore the HC direction was incorrect. en-us Mon, 12 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Oct 2025 19:16:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464398 SC allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court's directions, holding the impugned bid invalid and not entitled to consideration. The Court accepted NIC's affidavit that bid retrieval from the e-portal was not feasible, rejected the respondent's consultant opinion and assertions of retrieval, and found the respondent failed to obtain timely acknowledgement while other bidders did. The High Court's order effectively gave the respondent a second opportunity, which SC ruled cannot be countenanced, and therefore the HC direction was incorrect. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 12 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464398