Disposed

Resources of Aviation Redressal Association (Roar) and 5 Ors. v. Union of India and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC23 Feb 2016PIL/83/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to conduct a transparent public tender for the lease of airport land. The court held the issue could not be decided via writ jurisdiction and urged the petitioners to exhaust alternate remedies by filing a suit.

What did the court decide?

PIL disposed; petitioners directed to exhaust alternate remedy by filing a suit.

Resources of Aviation Redressal Association… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

PIL. 83-13

¶2

VPH

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 83 OF 2013

¶5

Resources of Aviation Redressal Association (ROAR) & Ors. … Petitioners Vs. Union of India & Ors. … Respondents

¶6

¶7

Mr. Vaibhav Pandya i/b V. J. Hegde, for the Petitioners.

¶8

Mr. Kevic Setalvad, Sr. Counsel a/w Kavita Anchan i/b M. V. Kini & Co., for Respondent No. 2.

¶9

¶10

CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 23, 2016

¶11

PC.

¶12

By this petition, which is filed as PIL, Petitioners are

¶13

seeking following reliefs:

¶14

“(a) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order and / or direction in the nature of mandamus, thereby directing the Respondent No. 1 and 2 to forthwith and in any event within such public time as may be permitted by this Hon'ble Court, call for appropriate

¶15

1 / 2

¶16

PIL. 83-13

¶17

public tenders and / or such public competitive bidding process in respect of the grant of the Lease of the land admeasuring 18000 sq. meters, situated at the junction of the Andheri – Ghatkopar Link Road and Airport Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai 400 059 more particularly described in the Deed of lease to the successful bidder strictly on merits, in accordance with the law and in a fair, open and transparent manner;

¶18

(b) for costs of this petition and such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court, may deem fit in the circumstances of the case aforesaid.”

¶19

In our view, this issue cannot be decided by us while exercising our writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the Petitioners, therefore, can exhaust an alternate available remedy, viz. filing an appropriate suit before the appropriate Court, if it is maintainable in law. Hence, PIL is disposed of reserving the right of the Petitioner to exhaust an alternate remedy, if available in law.

¶20

Sd/Sd/[REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.] [V. M. KANADE, J.]

¶21

Vinayak Halemath

¶22

2 / 2

Resources of Aviation Redressal Association (Roar) and 5 Ors. v. Union of India and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Resources of Aviation Redressal Association (Roar) and 5 Ors. v. Union of India and 2 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

Rashtriya Vyavsayik Shikshan Pragati Sanghatan Maharashtra Rajya through Its Secretary Rohit Suresh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Mrs. Rita W/O Mrityunjay Boyal and Others Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Ministry of Energy and Power Mumbai and Others

Shrikant Madhav Karve Vs the Secretary (Parivahan Iv), Ministry of Home Affairs Govt of Maha and Ors.

Shri. Santosh Abhimanya Bhosale and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Public Works Dept. and Ors.

Manoj Dadasaheb More Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anothers

Manoj S/O. Namdeorao Walke Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Rural Development and Water Conservation

Sushant Gajananrao Barahate Vs Govt. of Maharashtra Thorugh Its Chie Secretary, Mumbai and Others

Arpit Jagdish Minase, and Another Vs the State of Maharshtra, through Its Secretary, Dept. Mumbai and 3 Others

Noshir Moshin Chinwalla Vs Masterbaker Marketing Ltd.

F.G.P.Ltd. Vs Mr.Saleh Hooseini Doctor and Anr.

Sandeep Kantilal Jain Vs Mrs.Kalpana Kantilal Jain and 4 Ors.

Shri. Sharad Gundu Mestri Vs the District Collector and Ors.

Shri. Manoj Suresh Pingle Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Suo Motu Vs Vilas Haribhau Pote and Ors.