Judicial review of administrative discretion has played a vital role in remedying the abuse of administrative discretion. The judiciary’s role as the protector of the principles laid down in the constitution and larger natural
principles ensures a regulation of the administrative discretion so as to meet various constitutional and normative principles. Administrative discretion is a facet of administrative law necessary for the functioning of the legal system. I.P. Massey defined discretion as choosing from available alternative, which cannot be reconciled on the basis of considerations largely subjective and not entirely susceptible to proof. The rising
complexity in state function has led to the allocation of wide discretionary powers to the administration. Over the years the courts have identified various principles as the basis for reviewing such discretion. These
principles include the natural justice, fairness, reasonableness and other such principles. The scope of judicial review of administrative discretion in awarding government contracts may be traced by closely examining a
catena of cases in this regard- starting from Tata Cellular v Union of India. This paper shall address the scope of such review of discretion by studying a catena of cases highlighting this issue.