The court disposed of a writ petition challenging a tender process. The grievance was held infructuous due to the publication of a fresh tender notice.
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 OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.2412 OF 2013
M/s.Vegueshwara Construction
PETITIONER
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra and others RESPONDENTS
Mr.P.S.Dighe, Advocate for petitioner. Mr.K.S.Patil, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr.Mukul Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent No.2.
( CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI &
RAVINDRA V.GHUGE, J. )
DATE 10/09/2013
PER COURT :
(RAVINDRA V.GHUGE, J.) ( B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
khs/Sept. 2013/wp2412-13
M/s.Vegueshwara Construction
The State of Maharashtra
others
B.P.Dharmadikari
Ravindra V.Ghuge
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
