Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 7]

Chattisgarh High Court

M/S Agarwal Computer And Services Ltd vs The Chief General Manager 33 ... on 10 July, 2018

Bench: Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Pritinker Diwaker

                                                    1



                                                                                            NAFR
                          HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                 Writ Petition (C) No. 3125 of 2017
        M/s. Agrawal Computer and Services Ltd. Through its Proprietor Deepak Agrawal S/o
        Late S.P.Agrawal, aged about 38 years, Resident of B/6, Alka Complex, Near Hotel
        Shalin, TP Nagar, Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh, Pin Code 495684
                                                                                   ---- Petitioner
                                                Versus
           1. The Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coal Fields Limited (SECL) Seepat
               Road, Post Box No. 60, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
           2. South Eastern Coal Fields Limited (SECL) Through Material Manager, Office of
               General Manager (MM) Post Box No. 60, Seepat Road, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
               495006
                                                                              ---- Respondents

For Petitioners : Shri Ashutosh Shukla, Advocate. For Respondents : Shri Vaibhav Shukla, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Pritinker Diwaker, Judge Order on Board Per Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice 10/07/2018

1. Submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner is that the Respondent authorities, without cancelling the earlier tender issued a fresh tender and further since the Respondents did not return the earlier earnest money deposit, he was prevented from participating in the fresh tender.

2. The fact that a fresh notice inviting tender was issued is an indication of the fact the previous notice inviting tender, for whatever reasons, was not acted upon. So far as the refund of the earnest money deposit is concerned, learned counsel for the Respondents informs the Court, on due instructions, that the same has already been done.

3. No relief for interference is warranted in this writ petition. The same is accordingly dismissed.

                              Sd/-                                           Sd/-
                        (Ajay Kumar Tripathi)                         (Pritinker Diwaker)
                          CHIEF JUSTICE                                      JUDGE


Amit