Uttarakhand High Court
WPMB/539/2026 of MS MOHAN CONSTRUCTION Vs UTTARAKHAND RURAL ROADS DEVELOPMENT AGENCY on 7 July 2026
Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures 2026:UHC:5469-DB COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 07.07.2026 WPMB No. 539 of 2026 M/s Mohan Construction .....Petitioner Vs. Uttarakhand Rural Roads Development Agency & others
SL.
No
Date
Office Notes,
reports,
orders or
proceedings
or directions
and
Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
2026:UHC:5469-DB
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
07.07.2026
WPMB No. 539 of 2026
M/s Mohan Construction
.....Petitioner
Vs.
Uttarakhand Rural Roads Development Agency & others
....Respondents
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.
Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2.
3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner firm under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved primarily by the declaration of its tender as technically not qualified in the technical round on account of “documents not submitted as per ITB clauses”. The petitioner firm has filed objections against the rejection of its bid in the technical round and also against the decision of the Department in accepting the bid of M/s Nandani Construction- respondent no.6 as technically qualified in the technical round. The same are stated to be pending.
4. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the Department states that the Department is examining the objections filed by the petitioner firm and would take decision within a week. He further states that the financial bids would not be opened unless the objections filed by the petitioner firm are disposed of.
5. Having regard to the said stand, the writ petition is disposed of by providing that the Department shall pass speaking order on the objections of the petitioner firm and until objections are decided, the financial bids shall not be opened.
6. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
(Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)
NISHANT
NISHANT KUMAR Digitally signed by NISHANT KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=ad3fcb5ca64340f5dd0a4c574afa0fd63133605ca57cdc00ec2b7462b 452b326, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=7E81318F3B1BE7EAAC9370185F7C9C20892BC63A055CFD196 1690560487E670C, cn=NISHANT KUMAR Date: 2026.07.08 11:00:10 +05'30'