Disposed

M/S S.K. Associates and Another v. State of U P and 5 Others

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2021WRIC/914/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking a direction to issue a contract for constructing pontoon bridges transparently and accepting an offer at a discount, the Court observed no decision had been taken on the claim. It mandated the competent authority to pass an appropriate order within three days. The writ petition was disposed of without further judicial determination on the merits.

What the court decided

AI extract

M/S S.K. Associates and Another Vs State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 914 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- M/S S.K. Associates And Another Respondent :- State Of U P And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vikram D. Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kartikeya Saran

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Vikram D. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Ms. Suchita Mehrotra, Advocate holding brief of Shri Kartikeya Saran, learned counsel for the respondents.

¶6

By means of present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction commanding the respondents to issue contract in respect of construction of two further pontoon bridges in the Mela area of Magh Mela 2020-21 in accordance with the e- tendering process and in a fair and transparent manner. Further prayer has been made to command the respondent authorities to consider the offer of the petitioner for construction of two pontoon bridges at 23% below the departmental rate prior to issue of contract in respect of two pontoon bridges at the Mela area, Magh Mela 2020-21.

¶7

In response to the order dated 19.01.2021, Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has placed the detailed instruction in the matter. The same be taken on record.

¶8

After going through the record it is admitted position that no decision has been taken on the claim set up by the petitioner.

¶9

In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that so far as the grievance of the petitioner is concerned, the same is to be addressed by the Competent Authority i.e. third respondent, who will pass appropriate order within three days from today itself. Copy of this order is provided to Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel to ensure necessary compliance in the matter.

¶10

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of .

¶11

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad,

¶12

self attested by the petitioners alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶13

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶14

Order Date :- 1.2.2021 A. Pandey

M/S S.K. Associates and Another v. State of U P and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

M/S S.K. Associates and Another v. State of U P and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saravan Ram Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Satnam Singh Randhawa Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anuj Kame Vs Pallavi Chaudhary

Shri Pushpendra Singh and Another Vs Ganpati Infrastructure Development Co. Ltd. and 3 Others

Anju Sharma Vs Gaurav Sharma

Awadhesh Kumar and Another Vs Union of India and 7 Others