Challenging a notification for asset sale under the State Financial Corporation Act, the Court found the writ petition infructuous as no bids were received and the notice validity period had expired.
Writ Petition closed with no comment on merits and no costs awarded; miscellaneous applications disposed of.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT PETITION No. 19170 OF 2016
O R D E R:
Notification dated 24.02.2016 published in the newspaper ‘The Hindu’ bringing the seized asset of the petitioner company to sale by the 1st respondent Corporation, in exercise of the powers conferred on it under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, is challenged before this Court.
Various grounds have been raised in the Writ Petition, including the one that the petitioner has suffered loss on account of the alleged theft taken place in the premises of the unit which has already been seized by the Corporation.
Sri Vivekananda, learned counsel deputizing for Sri Y.N. Lohitha, learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent Corporation fairly submits that as on date, factually, on account of non-receipt of any responsive bid, pursuant to the notification dated 24.02.2016, the Corporation has kept in abeyance the process of sale. Since the challenge in the Writ Petition is to the notification dated 24.02.2016, validity of which is only for 90 days, the Writ Petition itself has become infructuous as no relief need be granted, is what the learned counsel contends.
Having taken into account and consideration the limited challenge in the Writ Petition and also keeping in view the submission made by the learned counsel that no responsive bids have been received so far, pursuant to the paper notification, and its validity being for 90 days, this Court is of the opinion that the cause in this Writ Petition does not survive any further.
In these circumstances, without expressing any opinion on merits, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the remedies as per law for redressal of its grievance, the Writ Petition is closed. No costs.
Consequently, the miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand disposed of.
CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J
17th June 2016
ksld
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner Company
1st Respondent Corporation
Challa Kodanda Ram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
