Disposed¶17

M/S. Kedar Security Services Pvt. Ltd., Bbsr v. Union of India

Orissa HC12 Feb 2025WP(C)/22980/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of writ petition; GeM tender dispute; Bid No.GEM/2024/B/4901213 dated 17.05.2024; L1/L2 bidder; alleged GEM portal manipulation; certiorari/mandamus sought for cancellation of L1 bidders; disposed as withdrawn without merits; no opinion expressed; liberty to approach Competent Authority; Union of India opposite parties; order dated 12.02.2025; bench K.R. Mohapatra and Sanjay Kumar Mishra, JJ.; no statute or precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition, with liberty to work out the petitioner's remedy with the Competent Authority. ¶17

M/S. Kedar Security Services Pvt. Ltd., Bbsr Vs Union of India — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) NO.22980 OF 2024

¶3

M/s Kedar Security Services Pvt. Ltd., …. Petitioner Bhubaneswar

¶4

Mr. Janaki Kanta Mahapatra, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Union of India & others …. Opp. Parties

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

ORDER

Order No.

12.02.2025

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶13

Petitioner in this writ petition prays for the following relief;

¶14

“The petitioner, therefore, prays that your Lordships would be graciously pleased to admit this Writ Petition, call for the records and after hearing the parties allow the same, issue writ/writs in the nature of certiorari/mandamus and/or any other further-writ and cancelation of both L1 bidders in the tender in the Bid No.GEM/2024/B/4901213 dated 17.05.2024 under Annexure-1 by the Opp. parties and directions to the Opp. party No.3 and 4 to investigation properly as because there was manipulated in the GEM portal, which both the L1 bidders shall not be allowed to execute the tender and the petitioner may allow to continue the said tender as the petitioner may allow to continue the said tender as the petitioner is a L2 bidder within a stipulated period, which may fixed by this Hon’ble court.

¶15

And for this act of kindness the Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.”

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

In course of argument, Mr. Mahapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays for withdrawal of the writ petition to work out its remedy with the Competent Authority.

¶18

In view of such submission, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of such submission made by learned counsel for the Petitioner, disposes of the writ petition as withdrawn.

¶19

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

¶20