Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The petition was filed by a company licensed to manufacture and trade Pan Masala brands like Rajnigandha, Tansen, and Mastaba seeking a declaration that Regulation 2(i) of Food Safety and Standards (Labelling and Display) Second Amendment Regulations, 2022 be declared as illegal and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g).
The Delhi High Court said that the non-appearance of the defendants evidenced their unwillingness to participate in the forensic examination and verification of their claims of the dead insect made in the social media posts.
The Delhi High Court said that the issuance of a commitment letter does not make the issuer a ‘bidder’ in the tender process.
The Delhi High Court directed the petition to be treated as a representation to the Chief Secretary, Government, State (NCT of Delhi).
“The petitioner having participated in the impugned tender process is entitled to know the reasons for the disqualification of its bid and not providing these answers is contrary to the requirement of transparency.”
The Court dismissed the petition on the ground of non-maintainability as only non-appointees can assail the legality of the appointment or extension procedure.
Delhi High Court stated that since the legislature in its wisdom has elected to impose this duty on the manufacturer and the pharmacist, we do not find any ground for issuing a direction as prayed for in this PIL as it would amount to judicial legislation.
“The aviation sector being a capital-intensive sector, the regulated free play given to the airlines to implement dynamic pricing of the fares for each flight appears to be in conformity with the norms followed worldwide and appears to be essential growth of the said sector.”
The Delhi High Court opined that tendering authority has the power to determine the terms on which tender will be given, unless the terms are not arbitrary and discriminating, the Court cannot scrutinize them.