Petitioner filed a writ petition to quash a tender notice. Upon learning the tender had been revoked and the petitioner was allowed to complete balance work, the petitioner withdrew the petition, which was disposed of accordingly.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P (C) No. 18231 of 2022
Nabadurga Construction Pvt. Ltd., ….. Mayurbhanj
Petitioner
Mr. P.C. Nayak, Adv.
Vs.
State of Odisha and others
….. Opposite Parties Mr. P.P. Mohanty, Adv.
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE S.K. MISHRA
ORDER
02.09.2022
W.P.(C) No. 18231 of 2022
And
I.A. No. 12040 of 2022
Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 05.
“2. That it is humbly submitted that during pendency of the writ petition, there was a discussion in the office of the Chief Engineer (Building & Bridges) Rural Works (O) and they agreed to revoke the termination of the contract and allow the petitioner to complete the balance work.”
Page 1 of 2
not want to press this Writ Petition and seeks for withdrawal of the same.
(DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE
Ashok/Ananta
(S.K. MISHRA) JUDGE
Page 2 of 2
Nabadurga Construction Pvt. Ltd.
State of Odisha
B.R. Sarangi
S.K. Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
