The High Court dismissed a writ petition for lack of maintainability. The petitioner failed to disclose the status of his organization or the tender bid details, rendering the claim misconceived.
Writ petition dismissed as misconceived.
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. - 34
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21864 of 2020 Petitioner :- Anand Tripathi Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gulab Chandra Tiwari,Kapil Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dharmendra Singh Chauhan
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Dharmendra Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the respondent.
The petitioner herein is Anand Tripathi s/o Paramhans Tiwari who claims to run an organisation in the name of 'M/s Urja' which according to him is a non Government organisation registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860.
The grievance is about the rejection of tender of the said organisation. The status of the petitioner's firm- 'Urja' is not known nor has been disclosed in the writ petition. Even otherwise, the tender/bidder has not been filed in the present writ petition with proper description.
We are, therefore, dismissing the writ petition being misconceived.
Dismissed , accordingly.
Order Date :- 10.12.2020 P Kesari
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the rejection of tender is maintainable in light of lack of disclosed details regarding the petitioner's organization and the tender bid.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Anand Tripathi
State Of U P
3 Others
Sunita Agarwal
Jayant Banerji
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
