Dismissing a writ petition regarding public procurement, the court noted that after a previous order directing objections to be heard, the matter was re-adjudicated and a fresh allotment process initiated.
Writ petition dismissed on the ground that a fresh process of allotment had been initiated following the resolution of prior objections.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 27
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10059 of 2018
Petitioner :- Yogendra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ziauddin,Siraj Ahmad Khan,Ziauddin Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
The matter is taken in the revised list. None appears to press this petition.
Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions received contends that a fresh proposal has been called for from the village panchayat. It is envisaged that petitioner and other persons who are eligible and interested for the appointment as fair price shop dealer shall submit their applications. The fresh proposal has been invited after hearing one Ravi Shanker. It is submitted that this court by order dated 4.12.2017 in Writ-C No.57696/17, Ravi Shanker Vs. State of U.P. and others, directed the respondents to decide the objections of the petitioner in the said petition before the proceeding with the allotment. He further submitted that the said objection has been decided and a fresh process of allotment has been initiated.
In view of the said submissions, the writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 17.4.2018
Pramod
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Writ-C No.57696/17, Ravi Shanker Vs. State of U.P. and others, dated 4.12.2017Referred¶6
Yogendra
State Of U.P.
Others
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
