Partly allowed

Sou. Anita Vaibhav Daware and Others v. the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Its Secretary, Urban Development Dept. and Others

Bombay HC27 Oct 2021WP/907/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the court considered the cancellation of an impugned communication dated 2nd February, 2021 by the Office Notes. Finding the communication cancelled, the court held that restoration of the E-Tender dated 18.12.2020 follows as a corollary.

What did the court decide?

Petition partly allowed; impugned communication certified as cancelled; restoration of E-Tender dated 18.12.2020 awarded.

Sou. Anita Vaibhav Daware and Others Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

1 wp907.2021.odt

¶2

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

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.907/2021

¶4

Sou. Anita Vaibhav Daware and others

¶5

..Vs..

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and others

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order

¶8

Mr. B.G. Kulkarni, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. D.P. Thakare, Addl.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
Mr. D.M. Kale, Advocate for respondent No.5.

¶9

Mr. Onkar Ghare, Advocate h/f Shri A.M. Ghare, Advocate for respondent
No.6.

¶10

CORAM:- SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND

¶11

ANIL L. PANSARE, JJ. DATED:27.10.2021.

¶12

Heard.

¶13

2.Mr. D.P. Thakare, learned Additional Government
Pleader has produced before us a copy of the
communication received by the Collector, Buldhana from
the Government of Maharashtra dated 26th October,
2021. It is taken on record and marked as “A” for
identification.

¶14

3.Document “A” states that communication dated 2nd
February, 2021, impugned in this petition, has been
cancelled. This satisfies the prayer clause (i) of the
petition. If the impugned communication has been
cancelled, as a natural corollary, restoration of E-Tender
dated 18.12.2020 would follow. Hence we partly allow
this writ petition in terms of prayer clause (ii). No costs.

¶15

 JUDGE

¶16

 JUDGE

¶17

Tambaskar.

Sou. Anita Vaibhav Daware and Others v. the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Its Secretary, Urban Development Dept. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sou. Anita Vaibhav Daware and Others v. the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Its Secretary, Urban Development Dept. 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

Amol Bhimraoji Dudhe Vs the General Manager, Maha. State Road, Trasnport Corporation, Mumbai and Another

Umesh S/O. Anandrao Rodge Vs Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Thr. Principal Secretary, Amravati and Others

Ku. Kalpana Anandrao Rodge Vs Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Thr. Principal Secretary, Amravati and Anr.

Gajanan S/O Baban Chavhan Vs Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, through Its Divisional Controller, Akola

St. Leelabai Wd/O Shri Motisaoji Padole Vs Municipal Council, Narkhed, Nagpur through Chief Officer

Shri Rushiprasad Bahuddeshiya Shikshan Sanstha, through Its President, Shri Pravin Vitthalrao Kadu Vs State of Maha. Thr. Dept. of Higher and Technical Education, Mumbai Thr. Secretary and Another