The court dismissed a civil review petition challenging a judgment in a special appeal regarding bid deposits. Petitioner alleged discriminatory action and failure to consider documents. The court held the documents were substantively meritless and the challenge failed on existing legal principles.
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.
-1-
D.B.Civil Review Petition No.141/2014 Dr.Deepak Kumar Mathur. VERSUS State of Raj. & Ors.
D.B.Civil Review Petition No.141/2014 In
D.B.Special Appeal (Writ) No.742/2014.
Dr.Deepak Kumar Mathur. VERSUS State of Rajasthan & Others.
03.11.2014.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.K.RANKA
Mr.R.K.Mathur, Sr.Counsel assisted by Mr.Prahlad Sharma, Counsel for petitioner.
It is a review petition, filed by one of the appellant, arising from judgment dt.24.09.2014 disposing of a bunch of appeals, preferred by the respective appellants.
Counsel for review petitioner Mr.Mathur submits that there were certain documents placed on record along with the application filed u/O.41 R.27 CPC but the same have not been taken into consideration by the court while passing the judgment dt.24.09.2014 and the basic bone of contention before the court was that the action was discriminatory but remained unnoticed and the question raised regarding discrimination at least deserves consideration at this stage.
It can be noticed by this court and also observed while passing the judgment dt.24.09.2014 that the appellants made their submissions on their own and there was no assistance extended to them by their respective lawyers as they were abstaining from work and the material available on record was taken note of at the time when the matter was heard.
Apart from it, what has been contended by counsel for review petitioner regarding documents placed for consideration along with the application filed u/O.41 R.27 CPC remained unnoticed, suffice it
-2-
D.B.Civil Review Petition No.141/2014 Dr.Deepak Kumar Mathur. VERSUS State of Raj. & Ors.
to say that once this court has arrived at the conclusion that depositing 15% of the bid amount does not confer any right and there is no concluded contract between the parties and at the same time no reasons are to be assigned by the competent authority in rejecting the bid, in these facts & circumstances, the documents on which the review petitioner wants to place reliance at the first time in appeal in support of his submission regarding discriminatory action of the respondent was not available for consideration before the ld.Single Judge and even from the documents which the review petitioner has placed for consideration and tried to convince this court, we do not find any substance after the view has been expressed by this court in detail while passing the judgment dt.24.09.2014.
Consequently, the instant review petition is devoid of merit, accordingly stands dismissed.
(J.K.RANKA),J.
(AJAY RASTOGI),J.
All corrections made in judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed. Solanki DS, Sr.P.A.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a review petition is maintainable when new documents submitted during review proceedings contain no substantive merit after the prior court has concluded there is no contract and no discrimina
Whether documents placed before the court for the first time under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC can sustain the allegation of discriminatory action.
Whether the review petition is devoid of merit given the established conclusion that no right accrues from depositing 15% of the bid amount.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dr. Deepak Kumar Mathur
State of Rajasthan
Ajay Rastogi
J.K.Ranka
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
