The petitioner challenged the rejection of its technical bid in a tender for cleaning sewer lines. The respondents conceded that the tender had been cancelled. The High Court disposed of the writ petition as infructuous in light of this admission.
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.
$~31
MS ADITYA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY .....Petitioner Through: Ms.Shikha Goel with Mr.Gagan Deep Garg, Advocates.
versus
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr.Prashant Manchanda, ASC with Ms.Nancy Shah and Ms.Isha Baloni, Advocates for R-1 & 2.
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
%
O R D E R 18.11.2024
MANMOHAN, CJ
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J
NOVEMBER 18, 2024/KA
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/11/2024 at 12:36:48
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition remains viable after the cancellation of the tender?
MS ADITYA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MANMOHAN
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
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
