Disposed

G.Kumaresan v. Hans Raj Veerma IAS

Madras HC25 Mar 2015CONT P/670/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court disposed of a contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience of an order in a writ petition. The court noted no work had been completed and approved the tender process where the advertisement was issued. The court permitted the petitioner to participate in the tender.

What did the court decide?

Permission is granted for the petitioner to participate in the tender process

G.Kumaresan Vs Hans Raj Veerma IAS — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 25.3.2015

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN

¶6

Contempt Petition No.670 of 2015

¶7

Excel Engineering Enterprises No.63, Tamaraikulam Elagiri Post, Jolarpettai, Vellore District rep. by its Proprietor G.Kumaresan. .. Petitioner Vs. 1. Hans Raj Varma, IAS State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government Environment and Forests (EC2) Department Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

¶8

Vinoth Kumar, IFS

¶9

Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (HOFF) Panagal Building, Chennai - 600 015.

¶10

Sudhansu Gupta, IFS Chief Conservator of Forests Planning and Development Panagal Building, Chennai 15. 4. Dinakar Kumar The Conservator of Forests Vellore Forest Circle Vellore, Vellore District.

¶11

K.Selvaraj The District Forest Officer Vellore Forest Division Vellore, Vellore District.

¶12

Dhanappan The District Forest Officer Tiruvannamalai North Forest Division Polur, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

¶15

Rajendran The District Forest Officer Tiruvannamalai South Forest Division Tiruvannamalai Tiruvannamalai District. .. Respondents

¶16

Petition against the wilful disobedience of the order dated 02.3.2015 made in W.P.No.32397 of 2014.

¶17

-----
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Doraisamy
For Respondents : Mr.M.K.Subramanian,
Spl.G.P. (Forest)
-----
O R D E R
This contempt petition has been filed alleging wilful
disobedience of the order dated 02.3.2015 made in
W.P.No.32397 of 2014.
2. Mr.M.K.Subramanian, learned Special Government
Pleader (Forest) takes notice for the respondents.
3. As per the previous orders, the District Forest
Officer, Tiruvannamalai South is obliged to take two
actions, namely (i) to have the measurement of the works so
far completed, taken by the Executive Engineer of the
Public Works Department, and (ii) to initiate a process of
inviting tenders.

¶18

Insofar as the first obligation is concerned, it is

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ stated by the District Forest Officer, Tiruvannamalai, who

¶20

is present in Court, that no work was ever started by the

¶21

¶22

private respondent. Therefore, the question of measurement does not arise.

¶23

As regards the second obligation, it is stated that the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tender Rules has been followed and advertisements were issued in Dinaboomi on 05.3.2015 and Dinamani on 06.3.2015. The publication was also made in the Government Gazette on 05.3.2015. Fortunately, the respondents have not split up the work, but had given advertisement for composite work. 6. Therefore, except recording that the petitioner should also be permitted to take part in the tender, no further directions are necessary. The petitioner shall be permitted to participate. The contempt is closed. kpl

¶24

SD/ DEPUTY REGISTRAR(CLAA) //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2015.

¶25

COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format. SM/CO/27/03/2015

¶26

One CC to M/s.S.Doraisamy, Advocate, SR.4343

¶27

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

G.Kumaresan v. Hans Raj Veerma IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Kumaresan v. Hans Raj Veerma IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Kumaresan Vs Hans Raj Veerma IAS

Siva Industries and Holdings L Vs Dr.O.N.Supriya Rao I.R.S.

R.Kala Vs Maharabhushanam

Csepdi- Trishe Consortium Vs Tamilnadu Generation and

S.Kannan Vs M.Tamilselvan

Binary Apparel Tecknics Vs Jane K.Nathaniel Irs