Dismissed

Asadulla Khan Maheboob Khan v. Municipal Council Kinwat through Chief Officer

Bombay HC20 Mar 2018PIL/39/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL, the petitioner challenged specific terms in an E-Tender for municipal solid waste management, alleging they were harsh and obstructive. The Court rejected the submissions, holding the conditions were necessary under Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, and dismissed the petition for lack of merit.

What did the court decide?

The Public Interest Litigation petition is dismissed.

Asadulla Khan Maheboob Khan Vs Municipal Council… — Environment and Pollution | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

pil39.18

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.39 OF 2018

¶6

Asadulla Khan Maheboob Khan,
Age-49 years, Occu:Labour,
R/o-Shivaji Nagar, Kinwat,
Tq-Kinwat, Dist-Nanded,
Mobile No. 9822447203
Adhar No. 298637561204

¶7

...PETITIONER

¶8

 VERSUS

¶9

Municipal Council, Kinwat,
Tq-Kinwat, Dist-Nanded,
Through its Chief Officer.

¶10

...RESPONDENT

¶11

 ...
 Mr.L.V. Sangit Advocate for Petitioner.

¶12

...

¶13

CORAM: S.S. SHINDE AND
 S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.

¶14

 DATE : 20TH MARCH, 2018

¶15

ORDER :

¶16

1. This Public Interest Litigation is filed
with following prayer:

¶17

pil39.18

¶18

¶19

"A) For a writ of certiorari Order or
direction in the nature of certiorari
calling for the record and proceedings of
E-Tender published by respondent on
08.03.2018 along with terms and conditions
(Exhibit 'B') and after examining the
legality, validity and propriety thereof,
the terms and conditions Sr. No.50 to 53 be
quashed and set aside."

¶20

2. Learned counsel appearing for the

¶21

Petitioner submits that some of the terms and
conditions in the E-Tender Process are harsh and

¶22

not required for the fair competition. The
Petitioner is aggrieved in respect of the terms
and conditions from Sr. Nos. 50 to 53. It is
submitted that, Condition No.50 is, the tenderer
must be having turn over of Rs.2 Crores per year.
Condition No.51 is in respect of having License of
Labourer issued by the competent authority/office.

¶23

Condition No.52 is in respect of obtaining the
Ability Certificate from Bank for amount of Rs.15
Lakhs. Condition No.53 is in respect of

¶24

pil39.18

¶25

¶26

Registration of Ape Auto in the name of tenderer.
The tenderer is also required to supply ten Apes
and three Tractors.

¶27

3.Learned counsel further submits that, the

¶28

above said terms and conditions are very harsh,
unnecessary, not required, not provided under any
Government Resolution, Rules framed by the
Government. It is submitted that the above said
terms and conditions are without any foundation,

¶29

baseless and therefore the same requires to be
cancelled and set aside. Learned counsel further

¶30

submits that the tenderer may take Ape as well as
Tractor on rent from third person and it is not
necessary that the same shall be registered in his

¶31

name. The condition of Annual Turn Over of Rs.2

¶32

Crores is also very harsh, unnecessary, and

¶33

because of the said condition most of the tenderer
may not participate in the process. Learned

¶34

counsel submits that for earlier tender process
there were no such harsh terms and conditions. He,

¶35

pil39.18

¶36

¶37

therefore, submits that the Public Interest
Litigation deserves consideration.

¶38

4.We have considered the submissions of
learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner,
perused the grounds taken in the Petition. The
conditions stipulated in the E-Tender process are
keeping in view the provisions of Solid Waste
Management Rules, 2016. Therefore the conditions
which are stipulated in the E-Tender process
initiated by Respondent Municipal Council for the
purpose of collection, segregation, storage,
transportation, processing and disposal of
Municipal Solid Waste of Kinwat City Municipal
Council for the period of three years, cannot be

¶39

said to be harsh or onerous. On the contrary,
those conditions will ensure strict observance of

¶40

the purpose for which the said E-Tender Process
has been initiated. There is no any specific

¶41

reason which has been stated in the Petition on
the basis of research made by the Petitioner so as

¶42

pil39.18
5

¶43

to cause interference in the E-Tender Process

¶44

initiated by the Respondent.

¶45

5.For the reasons afore stated, we are of
the considered view that the Public Interest
Litigation is devoid of any merits. Accordingly,
the Public Interest Litigation stands dismissed.

Asadulla Khan Maheboob Khan v. Municipal Council Kinwat through Chief Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asadulla Khan Maheboob Khan v. Municipal Council Kinwat through Chief Officer

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

Nagar Parishad Gharfala Vadh Virodhi Kruti Samiti Kurundwad through Shri. Sunil Balwant Kurundwde Vs the Chief Secreatary the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sharad Baliram Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary and Anr.

Shri. Mahaveer Digambar Aware Vs the Commissioner of Sugar, Maharashtra State, Pune and Ors.

Nagar Parishad Gharfala Vadh Virodhi Kruti Samiti Kurundwad through Shri. Sunil Balwant Kurundwde Vs the Chief Secreatary the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mohammad Shahid Sharif S/O Jamshed Sharif Vs State of Maha., Department of Urban Development Thr. Principal Secretary, Mumbai and Others

Nivrati Nagnath Khalangre and Others Vs the Union of India and Others

Prakash Kamlakar Pathak Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Abdul Sattar Raheman Kureshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kishor Mukundrao Pedgaonkar Vs Mangala Kishor Pedgaonkar and Another

Mangesh Damodharrao Deore Vs Sayyed Istahaq Sayyed Sujad Ali and Others

Godavari Laxmi Co. Op Bank Ltd. Jalgaon through Manager and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vasant Dnyanoba Darade Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kantu Shankar Rathod and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Quadri Khudratullah Sayyad Hasan, Secretary Aadarsh Jivan Vikas Pratishthan Vs the State of Mah and Ors.