(1.) Distribution of largesse in the shape of contracts, jobs, quotas, licences etc. has been provided by giving legal pro-tection not only by forging procedural safe-guards but also by confining/structuring and checking Government discretion in the mat-ter of grant of such largesse. State cannot give or withhold largesse in its arbitrary discre-tion or at its sweet will. However, it is in-variably seen that in the matter of choosing the person(s) for allotment of largesse, it in-variably faults in awarding such contracts.
(2.) In the present case also somehow simi-lar circumstances have been projected by the petitioner.
(3.) In order to understand the controversy in the present case, the relevant facts are re-quired to be noted.