The High Court disposed of the writ petition as infructuous because the validity period of the tender work under advertisement had already expired.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
902 WRIT PETITION NO. 834 OF 2016
MARTHAWADA MAHILA GRUH UDYOG CO OPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY THRU ITS PRESIDENT VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
... Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.Agrawal Pavankumar S. AGP for Respondent |State: Mr. A.R.Borulkar
... CORAM : R. M. BORDE & P.R. BORA, JJ. Dated: March 16, 2017
PER COURT :-
agp/-
MARTHAWADA MAHILA GRUH UDYOG CO OPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY THRU ITS PRESIDENT
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
R. M. BORDE
P.R. BORA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
