Tender – Stages and processes involved - Myriad stages and processes that a proposal passes through before coalescing into an NIT - Conscious of the acute necessity of a specific proposal, the tender inviting authority first conceives the project; then, it evaluates its logistical viability, and further enriched by the assistance of financial consultants and technical experts, the authority finally confects terms & conditions suitable for achieving the purpose of the project’s initiation and for taking it to its logical end - It is after that painstaking odyssey of continual application of mind that the tender inviting authority arrives at its conception of the nature of the project, expectations from the party that would ultimately be awarded the contract etc., commensurate to the project and the authority’s requirement - From that vantage point, the authority examines the tenderers’ bids, and takes a decision on which tenderer, on a relative basis, most appositely meets the requirements of the tender inviting authority - To adulterate that stream of decision making by interpolative interpretations (like the petitioner’s argument of apportionment with reference to extent of shareholding) on the suggestion of a bidder, would in this Court’s opinion be a constitutionally ill-suited coercive exercise.

“19. Judicial review of administrative action is intended to prevent arbitrariness, irrationality, unreasonableness, bias and malafides. Its purpose is to check whether choice or decision is made ’lawfully’ and not to check whether choice or decision is ’sound’. When the power of judicial review is invoked in matters relating to tenders or award of contracts, certain special features should be borne in mind. A contract is a commercial transaction. Evaluating tenders and awarding contracts are essentially commercial functions. Principles of equity and natural justice stay at a distance. If the decision relating to award of contract is bona fide and is in public interest, courts will not, in exercise of power of judicial review, interfere even if a procedural aberration or error in assessment or prejudice to a tenderer, is made out. The power of judicial review will not be permitted to be invoked to protect private interest at the cost of public interest, or to decide contractual disputes. The tenderer orcontractor with a grievance can always seek damages in a civil court. Attempts by unsuccessful tenderers with imaginary grievances, wounded pride and business rivalry, to make mountains out of molehills of some technical/procedural violation or some prejudice to self, and persuade courts to interfere by exercising power of judicial review, should be resisted. Such interferences, either interim or final, may hold up public works for years, or delay relief and succour to thousands and millions and may increase the project cost manifold…..”