Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/5594/2020 on 30 December 2020
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No. 5594 of 2020
Decided on: 30th December, 2020 ________________________________________________________ Pankaj Sharma
....Petitioner
Versus State of H.P. and others
…Respondents ________________________________________________________
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. The Hon’ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.
1 Whether approved for reporting? No. ________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Ms. Seema K. Guleria, Advocate.
For the respondent: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General, with Mr. Vinod Thakur, Mr. Vikas Rathor Additional Advocates General, Ms. Seema Sharma, Mr. Bhupinder Thakur and Mr. Yudhvir Singh Thakur, Deputy Advocates General.
Through Video Conferencing
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral)
The instant petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs: “(i) That the office order dated 06.11.2020 passed by respondent No.4 contained in
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
Annexure P-2 may kindly be quashed and set aside by issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari.
(ii) That the tender process initiated by the respondents vide Annexure P-1 for the works “ Sr. No. (iv) construction of link road from 16 miles to Sedan Km from 0/00 to 3/135 and Sr. No. (V) construction of Work road from Dawaroo to Chanawag Km from 00 to 1/700 (formation and cutting 5/7 meters)” may kindly be directed to be processed further and complete the tender bid process for the said work in a time bound manner. In the alternative, the respondents may kindly be directed by way of writ of mandamus to invite fresh tenders for the said work.
(iii) That the respondents may very kindly be directed to invite tenders for the said work contract in accordance with the notification as well as instructions as contained in Annexure P-4 by issuing a writ mandamus.”
2. It appears that tenders for construction of work in question had been called twice because of objections raised by Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, s/o Sh. Surinder Kumar Sharma and Smt. Nisha Sharma, wife of Sanjeev Kumar Sharma.
3. The beneficiary villagers appear to have been pressing hard for construction of the road, which then persuaded the respondents to carry out construction of the road through departmental labour/machinery by change of alignment and admittedly the work is now about to be completed.
4. Consequently, the instant petition has lost its efficacy with time and is disposed of as such, so also the pending application(s), if any, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan)
Judge
(Jyotsna Rewal Dua)
Judge December 30, 2020 (Gaurav)