A petition challenges a tender process. The respondent offered to withdraw a tender clause and extend deadlines. The petitioner voluntarily withdrew the petition, and the matter was disposed of accordingly.
Withdrawal of the writ petition accepted; matter disposed of.
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.
$~84
MANISH CHOPRA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr B.L. Wali
versus
SAFDARJUNG HOSPITAL & V M M C ..... Respondent Through: Mr Rajesh Mishra with Mr Gyan Singh, AO
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA O R D E R % 11.01.2016
The learned counsel for the respondent has taken instructions and states that a corrigendum would be issued whereby clause 11 of the NIT / tender dated 30.12.2015 would be deleted and that the last date of submission of bids and opening of bids shall also be extended. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent, on instructions from Mr Gyan Singh, Administrative Officer, Safdarjung Hospital, the learned counsel for the petitioner does not press this petition any further.
The same stands disposed of as such.
Dasti under the signature of the Court Master.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JANUARY 11, 2016 SU
MANISH CHOPRA
SAFDARJUNG HOSPITAL & V M M C
BADAR DURREZ AHMED
SANJEEV SACHDEVA
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
