"Where a decision is taken that is manifestly in consonance with the language of the tender document or subserves the purpose for which the tender is floated, the court should follow the principle of restraint.
"Technical evaluation or comparison by the court would be impermissible. The principle that is applied to scan and understand an ordinary instrument relatable to contract in other spheres has to be treated differently than interpreting and appreciating tender documents relating to technical works and projects requiring special skills," a bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra said.
NTPC had rejected the bid of Montecarlo for the development and operation of its Dulanga coal mining project on the grounds that the firm was not meeting qualifying criteria on techno-commercial evaluation.
Montecarlo went to the high court against decision of NTPC. The high court rejected the plea.
The apex court, dismissing the appeal of the firm, said, "Exercise of power of judicial review would be called for if the approach is arbitrary or malafide or procedure adopted is meant to favour one. The decision making process should clearly show that the said maladies are kept at bay. But where a decision is taken that is manifestly in consonance with the language of the tender document or subserves the purpose for which the tender is floated, the court should follow the principle of restraint.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content