Disposed

Pawandeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC22 May 2013CWP/10632/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the consolidation of piece-works and contractworks in single Notices Inviting Tenders by Divisional Engineers, alleging violation of the PWD Code. The court treated the petition as a representation, directing the Chief Engineer to investigate and issue directives if the action was contrary to the Code or unreasonable.

What did the court decide?

Petition treated as representation; direction to Chief Engineer to investigate action and issue directives if contrary to Code within one month.

Pawandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.10632 of 2013 Date of Decision : May 22, 2013

Pawandeep Singh

.....Petitioner

versus

State of Punjab and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH.

¶9

Present : Mr.Animesh Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶10

-.-

¶11

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶12

2.To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶13

3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

¶15

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶16

The principal grievance of the petitioner is against the Notices Inviting Tenders (for short, 'NITs') (Annexures P-6 to P-9) wherein the Executive Engineers of Ludhiana, Phagwara and Hoshiapur Drainage Divisions are said to have consolidated and clubbed the 'piece-works' and 'contractworks' in a single NIT. The action of the Divisional Engineers, according to the petitioner, is contrary to the Public Works Department Code and it denies equitable allocation of contracts particularly to medium and small scale contractors.

¶17

Since the NITs are alleged to have violated the technical terms of the Public Works Department Code, we dispose of this writ petition without expressing any views on merits on the petitioner's claim, with a direction to the Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department, Government of Punjab, to treat this writ petition as a representation on behalf of the

¶18

CWP No.10632 of 2013 [2]

¶19

petitioners; call for the records, if so required, and if it is found that the action of the Executive Engineers is contrary to the Code or otherwise unreasonable, the Chief Engineer shall issue necessary directives to them to follow henceforth the Code or the prescribed guidelines, meticulously. The petitioner shall also be at liberty to supplement his representation-cumcomplaint by producing additional documents, if any, before the Chief Engineer. The needful shall be done within a period of one month from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

¶20

Ordered accordingly. Dasti.

¶21

(SURYA KANT) JUDGE

¶22

May 22, 2013 (R.P.NAGRATH) Mohinder JUDGE

Pawandeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawandeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

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

Harminder Singh and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Ludhiana Improvement Trust Vs Harbhajan Kaur & Ors.

Balbir Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Balwinder Kaur & Ors. Vs State of Punjab &Ors.

Daljit Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Gurkirat Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.