As per case facts, a tender was issued for material supply. L. Y. Enterprises submitted the lowest bid, but it was rejected as -10 percent below the estimated cost, deemed ... unworkable. M/s R R R Enterprises' bid, which matched the justified rate (-7.31 percent below estimated), was accepted. L. Y. Enterprises challenged this, arguing their bid was within permissible limits under the CPWD Works Manual, as it was only 2.9 percent below the justified rate. The Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition, directing the contract to L. Y. Enterprises. The question arose whether the Single Judge correctly applied the CPWD Manual's permissible variation clause and if the lowest bid should have been accepted despite being below the fixed justified rate. Finally, the appellate court found that the justified rates were correctly fixed, and R R R Enterprises had quoted the exact justified rate. The court disagreed with the Single Judge's interpretation, stating that price isn't the sole criterion and expert committee decisions should be respected. Both appeals were allowed, and the Single Judge's order was set aside.