Principal Chief Conservator of Forest & Ors. Vs Suresh Mathew & Ors. (Supreme Court of India)
Supreme Court order that Government is the protector of financial resources of the state and has every right to cancel/call for fresh tender if it is in the nature of protecting the financial interests of the State
In the case of State of Orissa and others vs. Harinarayan Jaiswal and others, in relation to excise revenue, the Supreme Court observed as under:
“13. … The Government is the guardian of the finances of the State. It is expected to protect the financial interest of the State. Hence quite naturally, the Legislature has empowered the Government to see that there is no leakage in its revenue.
It is for the Government to decide whether the price offered in an auction sale is adequate. While accepting or rejecting a bid, it is merely performing an executive function. Thecorrectness of its conclusion is not open to judicial review.
We fail to see how the plea of contravention of Article 19 (1) (g) and Article 14 can arise in these cases…”
The law regarding government contracts or auctions and the nature and scope of its judicial review is well settled. In the case of M/s Michigan Rubber (I) Ltd. vs. State of Karnataka and ors. the Supreme Court observed as under:
