This judgment challenges a tender notice. The court held the petition infructuous because the tender was already awarded and work had progressed substantially. It was dismissed.
The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous.
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
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 197 OF 2010
Anil Kumar Jha ...Petitioner
Versus
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Prakash Mahadik for the Petitioner
Ms. S.I. Shah for Respondents No. 1 to 6
Mr. P.J. Jadhav, Assistant Government Pleader, for Respondent No. 7.
CORAM: J.N. PATEL AND A.P. BHANGALE, JJ . DATE: MARCH 23, 2010
P.C.:-
Heard.
2. The petition is filed challenging Tender Notice dated 27th
November, 2009 issued by respondent No.1, as also for a direction to respondent No.1 to invite fresh tender at a centralized location for submitting and opening of the same.
for the parties, we are of the view that as tender has already been
2
awarded, and the work has progressed substantially, in our view, the
Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed as infructuous. Accordingly, it is dismissed as such.
J.N. PATEL, J.
A.P. BHANGALE, J.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition filed challenging the tender notice is maintainable when the tender has been awarded and work has progressed.
Anil Kumar Jha
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. & Ors.
J.N. PATEL
A.P. BHANGALE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
