participants, documents of 12 participants did not satisfy the requirements of DTCN. Inadvertently, during evaluation of the technical bids, the same could not be detected. However, when the aforesaid defects were noticed, the authority decided to withhold the declaration of result of the lottery and subsequently took a conscious decision to cancel the entire tender process. It is her submission that after cancellation of the impugned tender process steps are being taken for inviting a fresh tender. It is her submission that in order to make the bid process transparent, unambiguous and fair, the authority had to take a decision to cancel the entire tender process. Referring to Clause 5 of Section 2 as well as Clause 18 of the Section-1 of DTCN, Ms.Pattnaik, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the tender inviting authority reserves the right to reject any or all the bids without assigning any reason thereof and the said decision is final. Although the Petitioner was found eligible in the lottery, no final decision was taken adjudging him successful before Annexure-6 was issued. As such, the Petitioner is not entitled to assail the cancellation of the tender process in question. Taking into consideration the peculiar fact situation, the Tender Inviting Authority had to take the decision to cancel the tender process for the reasons stated above, which can never be said to be unreasonable and arbitrary. The case laws cited by the Petitioner are not applicable to the case at hand, as
