Dismissed

Gram Panchayat ,Pawta v. State of Haryana through Its Secretary to Government of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Feb 2019CWP/3960/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil writ petition, the Gram Panchayat, Pata, challenged interference by State authorities in executing works. The respondent filed a reply stating that tender proceedings were halted and funds returned to allow development work to begin. The Court held the relief sought was infructuous and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The relief sought in the petition is rendered infructuous.

Gram Panchayat ,Pawta Vs State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Punjab & Haryana HC (2019)

¶1

I N THE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDI GARH

¶2

Ci vi l Wr i t Pet i t i on No. 3960 of 2019 ( O&M) DATE OF DECI SI ON: 26. 02. 2019

¶3

Gr am Panchayat , Pawt a

¶4

…. . Pet i t i oner

¶5

ver sus

¶6

St at e of Har yana and ot her s

¶7

. . . . . Respondent s

¶8

CORAM: - HON’ BLE MR. JUSTI CE KRI SHNA MURARI , CHI EF JUSTI CE HON’ BLE MR. JUSTI CE ARUN PALLI , JUDGE

¶9

Pr esent : Mr . Raj esh Lamba, Advocat e f or t he pet i t i oner Shr i Deepak Bal yan, Addi t i onal Advocat e Gener al , Har yana

¶10

KRI SHNA MURARI , CHI EF JUSTI CE : ( Or al )

¶11

Gr am Panchayat , Pawt a, Di st r i ct Far i dabad, has appr oached t hi s Cour t r ai si ng a gr i evance wi t h r espect t o i nt er f er ence of t he St at e aut hor i t i es i nt o t hei r r i ght t o get cer t ai n wor ks execut ed wi t hi n t hei r t er r i t or i al l i mi t s.

¶12

A shor t r epl y f i l ed on behal f of r espondent Nos. 1 t o 4 by t he Execut i ve Engi neer , Panchayat i Raj , Far i dabad, i n cour t t oday i s t aken on r ecor d. I n par agr aph- 8 t her eof , i t i s st at ed t hat t he pr oceedi ngs f or i nvi t i ng t ender s have al r eady been st opped by t he of f i ce of t he deponent and t he f unds al r eady r ecei ved f or devel opment wor k have al so been r et ur ned t o t he of f i ce of Addi t i onal Deput y Commi ssi oner , Far i dabad, f or t he r evi sed admi ni st r at i ve appr oval so t hat t he devel opment wor k of t he vi l l age can be st ar t ed by t he Gr am Panchayat .

¶13

PARKASH CHAND 2019.02.26 17:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶14

CWP- 3960- 2019

¶15

- 2 -

¶16

I n vi ew of t he af or esai d f act s, t he r el i ef sought i n t hi s pet i t i on i s r ender ed i nf r uct uous whi ch i s not bei ng obj ect ed t o by l ear ned counsel f or t he pet i t i oner .

¶17

Pet i t i on accor di ngl y st ands di smi ssed.

¶18

( KRI SHNA MURARI ) CHI EF JUSTI CE

¶19

( ARUN PALLI ) JUDGE

¶20

1. 2019 par kash

¶21

NOTE: Whet her speaki ng/ non- speaki ng: Speaki ng Whet her r epor t abl e: YES/ NO

¶22

PARKASH CHAND 2019.02.26 17:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Gram Panchayat ,Pawta v. State of Haryana through Its Secretary to Government of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gram Panchayat ,Pawta v. State of Haryana through Its Secretary to Government of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Haryana and Others Vs Deepa Devi and Another

Gurmail Singh Vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ambala

Ajit Singh and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others

Vokesh Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

State of Haryana and Others Vs Nasib Kumar and Others

Gram Panchayat ,Pali Vs State of Haryana through Secretary to Government of Haryana