Disposed

Vinod Upadhyay v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC2 Jul 2018WRIC/21830/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging tender execution by Zila Panchayat Hathras without a requisite committee. Instead of adjudicating merits, the Court directed the petitioner to approach the appropriate statutory authority under Section 228 within 10 days.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioner to make a fresh representation before the appropriate authority under Section 228 of UP Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961 within 10 days.

Vinod Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Public Procurement and Tenders | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21830 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Vinod Upadhyay Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Shukla,Gaurav Maurya Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anshu Chaudhary

¶4

Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, for the following relief;

¶7

"A. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to stop the execution of all tenders dated 11.1.2018, 25.1.2018 and 26.5.2018 as floated by Zila Panchayat Hathras without constitute requisite committee known as Nirman Karya Samiti and to be constitute under section 64 of the Act 1961.

¶8

B. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the decision as taken in minutes of meeting dated 02.05.2018 with extend to start execution of the tenders for construction which has already stopped by respondent no. 2 and for final decision pending before the State Government and quash the illegal constitute samiti."

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner drew the

¶10

attention of the Court towards irregularity and illegality allegedly committed by the concerned Zila Panchayat, Hathras in inviting and accepting the tenders from participants and in support thereof he referred certain documents annexed along with the writ petition.

¶11

At the very outset, Sri H.N. Singh, learned counsel for the Zila Panchayat submitted that the petitioner has got a statutory remedy to approach the Prescribed Authority under Section 228 of the Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961 for seeking redressal of his grievances, as such, the present writ petition is misconceived and is liable to be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.

¶12

Heard Sri C.L. Pandey, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Sri H.N. Singh, learned counsel for the Zila Panchayat and perused the record.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make a fresh representation before the appropriate authority under Section 228 of the Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961 ventilating all his grievances within 10 days from today along with a certified copy of this order enclosing therewith a copy of the writ petition and its entire Annexures and, if any such representation is made, the said authority shall make all endeavours to consider and decide the same in

¶14

accordance with law expeditiously preferably within 30 days from the date of receipt of the said representation after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and the successful alleged bidders.

¶15

Let a certified copy of this order be issued within three days from today on payment of usual charges.

¶16

Order Date :- 2.7.2018 vinay

Vinod Upadhyay v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Upadhyay v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shree Ram Constructions Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Ravendra Singh Vs U.P. Power Corporation Limited and 3 Others

Ram Chandra Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. and Others