https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465846 The dominant issue was whether the HC should exercise Art. 226 jurisdiction to direct re-conduct of a reverse auction and invalidate the award on the ground of an alleged technical glitch causing loss of opportunity. The HC held that the controversy was predominantly technical and fact-intensive, requiring evaluation of electronic records, system logs, and other technical evidence, which cannot be satisfactorily adjudicated on affidavits in writ proceedings and lies outside the institutional competence and limited scope of a writ court; absence of pleaded mala fides against the e-procurement platform or its officials further militated against interference. Consequently, the writ petition was not entertained and was dismissed. en-us Fri, 28 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jan 2026 10:21:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465846 The dominant issue was whether the HC should exercise Art. 226 jurisdiction to direct re-conduct of a reverse auction and invalidate the award on the ground of an alleged technical glitch causing loss of opportunity. The HC held that the controversy was predominantly technical and fact-intensive, requiring evaluation of electronic records, system logs, and other technical evidence, which cannot be satisfactorily adjudicated on affidavits in writ proceedings and lies outside the institutional competence and limited scope of a writ court; absence of pleaded mala fides against the e-procurement platform or its officials further militated against interference. Consequently, the writ petition was not entertained and was dismissed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 28 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465846