Disposed

Gram Panchayat, Koparda and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC4 Sept 2013WP/1267/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court held that the controversy regarding the auction of a sand guard became infructuous due to the expiration of the lease period caused by an interim stay. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of while granting the successful bidder two weeks to apply for a refund.

What did the court decide?

Granted two weeks to apply for refund of the amount and disposed of the writ petition.

Gram Panchayat, Koparda and Others Vs the… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

(1)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

¶3

Writ Petition No. 1267 of 2013

¶4

Gram Panchayat, Koparda, Taluka : Bhokardan, Dist. Jalna, Through its Sarpanch, Digambar s/o. Shamrao Pabale, Age : 54 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Koparda, Taluka : Bhokardan, District : Jalna.

¶5

Kaduba s/o. Bajeba Pabale, Age : 48 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Koparda, Taluka : Bhokardan, District : Jalna.

¶6

Samadhan s/o. Shrirang Sahane, Age : 28 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Koparda, Taluka : Bhokardan, District : Jalna.

¶7

Gajanan s/o. Piraji Pabale, Age : 35 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Koparda, Taluka : Bhokardan, District : Jalna.

.. Petitioners.

versus

(2)

1.	The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Revenue and Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2.	The Collector, Jalna, Taluka & District : Jalna.
3.	The Sub-Divisional Officer, Jalna, Taluka & District : Jalna.
4.	The Tahsildar, Bhokardan, Taluka : Bhokardan, District : Jalna.
5.	The Senior Geologist, Survey Officer, Ground Water Survey Office, Collector Office, Aurangabad.
6.	B.M. Danave Patil, Age : 45 years, Occupation : Contractor,
	R/o. Shivajinagar, Mahada Colony, Bhokardan Road, Jalna. .. Respondents. .........................
	Mr. Pravin S. Dighe, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. V.D. Godbharle, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1 to 5.

¶13

Mr. G.V. Patil, Advocate, for respondent no.6.

¶14

(3)

¶15

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, JJ.

¶16

DATE : 4TH SEPTEMBER 2013

¶17

COURT'S ORDER (Per B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.) :

¶18

Heard Adv. Mr. P.S. Dighe for the petitioners, learned AGP Mr. V.D. Godbharle for respondent nos.1 to 5, and Adv. Mr. G.V. Patil for respondent no.6.

¶19

The grievance is in relation to auction of sand guard held in January 2013. The lease period was up to 31st July 2013. The said period has already expired. This Court granted interim stay in the matter on 13-2-2013 and hence, successful bidder i.e. respondent no.6 could not excavate any sand till today.

¶20

In this situation, as period for which auction was held has already expired, the controversy is rendered infructuous.

¶21

In view of the orders passed today, in Writ Petition No. 1261 of 2013, we propose to dispose of the present petition by passing same directions to the concerned authority and grant same liberty to respondent no.6.

¶22

Respondent no.6 could not operate sand guard because of interim orders passed by this Court. We, therefore, grant time of two weeks from today, to apply to the competent authority for refund of the amount. If such application is moved, same shall be decided by the

¶23

(4)

¶24

competent authority within further period of four weeks. If respondent no. 6 is found entitled for refund of the amount, same shall be refunded to him within further period of four weeks.

¶25

With these directions and keeping rival contentions open, we dispose of the Writ Petition. No costs.

¶26

( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE ) ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ) JUDGE JUDGE

¶27

bgp/wp1267

Gram Panchayat, Koparda and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gram Panchayat, Koparda and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

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

Dr. Syed Abdul Wahab Abdul Aziz Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Motichand Hukumchand Bundelkandi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sharad Shahurao Bawar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kacharu Hiralal Bahure Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Madhavrao Himatrao Joshi and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ashutosh Eknath Supekar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another