This order dismisses a stay application and refuses an undertaking, noting the tender is too advanced. The writ petition is placed for final disposal in two weeks.
The civil application for stay was disposed of; the undertaking was not accepted.
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.
1/2
(CAW 640 of 2016).
vat
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 640 OF 2016 IN
WRIT PETITION No. 379 OF 2016
M/s. Sayed Asif Ali ….Applicant In the matter between M/s. Sayed Asif Ali ….Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ….Respondents .
Mr.Y.S. Jahagirdar, Senior Counsel a/w. Mr. Rampal Singh Kohli for Applicant / Petitioner
Mr.Shekhar Jagtap i/b. J. Shekhar & Co. for Respondent Nos. 3 to 5
Mr.V.B.Thadani -AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2
CORAM : V. M. KANADE & M.S. KARNIK , JJ.
DATE : MARCH 30, 2016
P.C. :
Applicant for stay to the execution and/or operation and/or implementation and/or to the effect of the impugned order dated
2/2
(CAW 640 of 2016).
31st December, 2015 was rejected by this Court and the ad-interim relief claimed by the Petitioner in the WP No. 379 of 2016 was also rejected by this Court.
M.S.KARNIK, J. V.M. KANADE, J.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Court should accept the undertaking offered by the petitioner given the advanced stage of the tender process.
M/s. Sayed Asif Ali
The State of Maharashtra
Ors.
V. M. Kanade
M. S. Karnik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
