His Holiness Shailesh P. Brahme, J. observed that the matter involves a concluded contract and a contractual dispute rather than a tender process petition, directing removal from this board.
Removed from the board; to lie before Court No. 1.
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.
1 wp 7432.24
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 7432 OF 2024
Vaibhav Ashok Pawar .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents
Shri Amol R. Gaikwad, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri K. S. Patil, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ. DATE : 18 JULY, 2024.
ORDER :
. Petitioner has been already allotted work and there is a concluded contract. His grievance is that due to impugned communication the work has been stalled. It would be a contractual dispute and not a petition pertaining to any tender process. Matter would lie before the Court No. 1. Remove from, the board.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ]
bsb/July 24
Vaibhav Ashok Pawar
The State of Maharashtra
Mangesh S. Patil
Shailesh P. Brahme
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
