The petitioner sought a direction for allotting a loading and unloading contract only to a society holding licences under the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing Act, 1963. Held, the writ petition is misconceived without cause of action as the contract was not yet allotted. Dismissed.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7473 OF 2008
DIST.: SOLAPUR
Hamal, Tolar and Gadivan Panchayat ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents.
Mr. Damle i/by Mr. Sagar Joshi for the Petitioner
Mrs. M.P. Thakur, Assistant Government Pleader, for Respondents No. 1 to 3.
CORAM : B ILAL NAZKI and J.H. BHATIA, JJ. DATE : DECEMBER 4, 2008
P.C. :-
Respondent No. 4 has invited tenders for award of a contract of loading and unloading on 20th October, 2008. The petitioner wants this Court to issue direction that the contract should only be allotted to a Society whose members are holding licence under the provisions of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing Act, 1963. So far, respondent No. 4 has not allotted the contract. As such, the Writ Petition is misconceived and without cause of action. Dismissed.
BILAL NAZKI, J.
J.H. BHATIA, J.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition has a cause of action regarding the requirement of licences for contract allotment.
Whether the claim for directing contract allotment to a society holding specific licences lies on the face of the plaint.
Hamal, Tolar and Gadivan Panchayat
State of Maharashtra
BILAL NAZKI
J.H. BHATIA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
