Writ petition challenging a Notice Inviting Tender. Petitioner informed court tender has been cancelled. Court dismissed petition as infructuous.
Petition dismissed as infructuous.
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.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC040008532021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : WP(C) 284/2021
1:M/s Y P Enterprises
Represented by its Sole Proprietor, Shri Oni Panyang, S/o Late Panam Panyang, R/o Village Tebo, P.O and P.S Pasighat, District East Siang, Arunachal Pradesh. Contact No. 918787728367
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.
Represented by the Commissioner, Public Works Department, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar
2:The Chief Engineer Highway Zone PWD Itanagar Arunachal Pradesh.
3:The Executive Engineer Highway Zone PWD Itanagar Arunachal Pradesh
Advocate for the Petitioner : T T Tara
Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP)
Page No.# 2/2
BEFORE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA
ORDER
Date : 12.09.2022
Heard Mr. T. Gyatso, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Also heard Ms. Pubi Pangu, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the State Respondents.
Mr. Gyatso, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has informed him that the Notice Inviting Tender(NIT), dated 06.08.2021, which was put to challenge, has been cancelled by the respondent authorities. He, accordingly, prays for closure of this writ petition.
In view of the submission made above by Mr. Gyatso, learned counsel for the petitioner; the instant writ petition stands dismissed as having become infructuous.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
M/s Y P Enterprises
The State of Arunachal Pradesh
Nani Tagia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
