Supreme Court Clarifies Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation: Public Interest Overrides Individual Claims

This judgment is significant as it prevents the 'freezing' of administrative processes. If the executive determines that a change in tender criteria will lead to better service delivery or prevent a monopoly, the private interest of a bidder—based on a 'legitimate expectation' of the old rules—must give way to the collective good. The Court noted that judicial review in such cases is limited to checking whether the change was 'arbitrary, unreasonable, or biased.' For governance, this provides a clear mandate: while the state must remain predictable and fair, it is not a prisoner of its past decisions when the public interest demands a shift. It balances the need for administrative efficiency with the constitutional requirement of non-arbitrariness. UPSC Relevance: This judgment is a vital addition to topics concerning Administrative Law and the Separation of Powers. It can be used in GS Paper II to discuss the limits of judicial review over executive policy and in GS Paper IV (Ethics) to illustrate the primacy of public interest over individual claims in the utilization of public funds and state resources.