Dismissed

Rakesh Rangrao Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC15 Feb 2012PIL/44/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged a contract awarded by the Local Municipal Council, alleging poor supervision. The single-judge bench dismissed it for lack of substance, absence of specific allegations against officers, and the presumption that statutory authorities discharge duties properly.

What did the court decide?

The petition praying for the work to be conducted under the supervision of the Collector was dismissed as having no substance.

Rakesh Rangrao Patil Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 44 OF 2011

¶4

"Rakesh Rangrao Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others."

¶5

Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders Memoranda of Coram or directions and Registrar's orders. appearances, Court's Orders

¶6

¶7

Mr. N.B. Suryawanshi, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. V.D. Godbharle, AGP for respondent No.1 Mr. S.P. Shah, Advocate for respondent No.5 Mr. Shailesh P. Brahme, Advocate for respondent No.6.

¶8

CORAM :- B.R. GAVAI &

¶9

SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, JJ.

¶10

DATE :- 15th FEBRUARY, 2012.

¶11

PER COURT :-

¶12

1] Petition is purely out of the award a contract by the learned Municipal Council. A general and vague allegation is made that the respondent Municipal Council would not supervise construction and water supply scheme properly. It is therefore prayed that the work should be conducted under the supervision of the Collector. Neither any allegations have been made against any of the officers of the municipal council nor they have been impleaded as party respondents, in support of the allegations that they are not competent enough to supervise the work in question.

¶13

2] The Collector cannot be expected to supervise personally each and every work in the entire district. When powers are bestowed upon the authorities under a particular

¶14

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶16

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 44 OF 2011

¶17

"Rakesh Rangrao Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others."

¶18

Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders Memoranda of Coram or directions and Registrar's orders. appearances, Court's Orders

¶19

¶20

statute, the presumption is that the authorities would discharge their duties in accordance with law. No doubt, that the said presumption is rebuttable. However, for that, a very heavy onus lies on the person making allegations in that regard.

¶21

3] We find the petition to be bereft of any such averments. In any case, the tender was widely publicized. In response to the tender notice, 3 bidders submitted their tenders and the best of it which is in the interest of the Municipal council has been accepted. The petition is without any substance. Hence, the same is dismissed.

¶22

grt/-

Rakesh Rangrao Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Rangrao Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jitendra Narendra Shende Vs Collector, Amravati Division, Amravati

Dr. Kailash S/O Devideen Japsare Vs State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty. and Ors.

Shri Subhash S/O Deorao Langewar Vs State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty. and Ors.

Adarsha Nagar Nagarik Seva Samiti and Anr. Vs the Chief Officer, Mumbai Housing and Area Development Board and 4 Ors.

Kaustubh S/O Uttamrao Fule Vs Union of India, through Its Chief Secretary and Another

Bharat Nagar Nagrik Mandal Thr. Its Secty Vs the N.M.C. Thr. Its Municipal Commissioner and Anr.

Moinuddin Khan Hazi Anwarul Haq Vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Shri. Suresh Shamrao Powar Vs State of Maharashtra, through Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Asaram Ravji Sathe Vs Secretary Office of the Governer Mumbai and Anr.

Sandeep Bhausaheb Dangat and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bharat Ravindra Sabale Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Raj Alias Papulal Jadhav (Naik) Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kavita Bansi Wagh@Kavita Vijay Sonawane Vs Education Officer(Secondary), Zp, Aurangabad and Ors.

Balu Sahebrao Bodkhe and Anr. Vs State Election Commission and Ors.