Dismissed

Hbt Security Force, Nagpur through Prop. Mohammad Ruhul Amin Qureshi v. State of Maharashtra, Minorities Development Department, Mumbai through Secretary and Others

Bombay HC16 Jan 2020WP/304/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the shutdown and tender re-issuance for a work contract, the High Court held that it is a commercial contract dispute. The court found no statutory bar preventing the petitioner from approaching the Civil Court and thus dismissed the writ petition with liberty to approach the civil court.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with liberty to approach the Civil Court.

Hbt Security Force, Nagpur through Prop. Mohammad… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

WP304.2020

¶2

1/1

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION No.304/2020
HBT Security Force through its Proprietor

¶5

Vs.

¶6

State of Maharashtra, Minorities Development Deptt. Through Secretary and others.

¶7

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

¶8

Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders
or directions and Registrar’s orders.

¶9

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶10

Shri S.V.Sirpurkar, Advocate for petitioner.
Mrs. A.R.Kulkarni, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for respondent no. 1.

¶11

CORAM: R.K.DESHPANDE and
 A.S.CHANDURKAR, JJ.

¶12

DATE: 16.01.2020

¶13

The petitioner claims to have secured the work
contract for the period from 24/07/2019 to 23/07/2022.
However without issuing any notice, fresh tenders are
invited to outsource the work which is being performed by
the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has preferred this
petition.

¶14

It is a matter of commercial contract and if
there is a breach of contract on the part of the respondents,
the petitioner has a remedy of approaching the Civil Court.
We have not been pointed out any statutory provision
which creates a bar to entertain the dispute by the Civil
Court. We are therefore not inclined to entertain the writ
petition.

¶15

The writ petition is dismissed with liberty to
the petitioner to approach the Civil Court. All questions are
left open. No costs.

¶16

 JUDGE JUDGE

¶17

Andurkar..

Hbt Security Force, Nagpur through Prop. Mohammad Ruhul Amin Qureshi v. State of Maharashtra, Minorities Development Department, Mumbai through Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hbt Security Force, Nagpur through Prop. Mohammad Ruhul Amin Qureshi v. State of Maharashtra, Minorities Development Department, Mumbai through Secretary and Others

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

Mohan S/O Jijeba Gore Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, General Administration Department, Mumbai

Saquib Nadeem S/O Abdul Naim Vs Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad and Others

Mr. Sanjay S/O Tikadas Ninawe Vs Suresh Wankhede, Joint Commissioner and Vice Chairman, S. T. Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee

Dr. Umakant S/O Padmakar Ramteke Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Public Health Department, Mumbai and Others

Vidharbha Processing and Marketing Cooperative Society, through Manager, Shri Babarao Daryaji Lothe Vs the Collector, Washim

Mahila Arthik Vikas Bachat Gut, through Its President, Smt. Karuna W/O Krishnarao Chimankar Vs the State of Maharashtra,through Its Secretary, Women and Child Development Department, Mumbai and