avuf.blogg.se - Eenie meenie miney mo spanish

Further, the mere use of the ground of public interest or financial loss caused to treasury cannot redeem the decisions taken by the previous regime unless factual and figurative evidence is provided.Initiating the tender process therein after receiving money from the selected bidders and changing tender allotment is an act of abusing bureaucratic power.Dissolving over hyper-technical reasons cannot be granted for being contrary to the doctrine of fairness.Said decisions were appealed by CIDCO in the Supreme Court.

The decision was challenged by the said Companies and the High Court quashed the cancellations as the authority was initially granted by CIDCO and failed to provide factual evidence and figure on behalf of CIDCO and on the basis of Estoppel.

According to its findings, the aforementioned allotments for winning bids got cancelled.

Due to complaints made to CIDCO regarding alteration from the terms and conditions a preliminary inquiry was held by the officials of the Urban Development Authority.

Later due to the global pandemic and recession, there were a couple of requests to change in use of land made to the CIDCO which got accepted.

Letter of allotment issued by CIDCO officially confirmed the winning of bid.

Yet, the CIDCO officials rejected the objection and proceeded with the former as it was the highest bidder.

Metropolis Hotels bid on this tender which was objected by Indian Hotels Company Ltd.

Tender was called by the City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra (CIDCO) to lease a certain property (land) for infrastructural development.

The decision was made by the division bench represented by Honourable Chief Justice N V Ramana, Justice Vineet Saran and Justice Surya Kant.

Public authorities have a responsibility to maintain the Right to Equality under Article 14 of the Constitution, Fairness, Arbitrariness and to maintain zero favouritism in the process of transparent bidding for government contracts.

Such abuse of bureaucratic power would result in the reluctance of businessmen to engage in government contracts comprises.

As it leads to jeopardizing the public interest in the long run.

Sheer reasoning of “Public Interest” cannot be used to revoke the work done by the previous regime.

This obligation has no exemption for State, who can be a party to a contract. As upholding the principles of Law as well as equity. They are bound to fulfil the agreement that they have entered into.

Fairness and bona fide standard embedded in contracts is applicable to all parties to a contract.

When the State is bringing up allegations of financial loss or defence through public interest onus vests on the State and it is bound to produce evidence in material facts and numbers.