Jharkhand High Court
M/S Aditya Arav Dev- Construction Co. ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 11 May, 2018
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 JHA 361
Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 5384 of 2015
M/s Aditya Arav Dev- Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., having its
Branch Office at Mahuda More, Ramnagargarh, Dhanbad-
828305, through one of its Directors Sri Laxman Singh, S/o Late
Shivjee Singh, Mahuda More, P.O. Ram Nagar Garh, P.S.
Mahuda, Dist. Dhanbad. ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Managing Director, Mineral Area Development
Authority, MADA Building, Luby Circular Road, P.O. & P.S.
& District- Dhanbad- 826001.
3. Technical Member, Mineral Area Development Authority,
MADA Building, Luby Circular Road, P.O. & P.S. & District-
Dhanbad- 826001.
4. Executive Engineer, Water Supply, Mineral Area
Development Authority, MADA Building, Luby Circular
Road, P.O. & P.S. & District- Dhanbad- 826001.
5. Executive Engineer, Nagar Niveshan, Mineral Area
Development Authority, MADA Building, Luby Circular
Road, P.O. & P.S. & District- Dhanbad- 826001.
6. M/s Swastik Engineering Works, Diversion Road, Doranda,
P.O. & P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi.
... ... Respondents
---
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioner : None
For the Respondents : Mr. Kumar Rahul Kamlesh,
A.C. to S.C.-II
---
04/11.05.2018 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner.
2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:
a) "For issuance of a direction or a writ in the nature of mandamus upon the respondents to cancel the agreement no.
09/20105-16, and the work order no. 08/2015-16 dated 14.09.2015 awarded to the respondent no. 6 for the work of "Renovation of 12 MGD and 9 MGD Water Treatment Plant at Damodar Head Works, Jamadoba of MADA, Dhanbad, supplying, installation and commissioning of motor pump and replacement of filter media, replacement of valve etc. for improvement of water supply of Jharia Coal Fields during 2015- 16 (Civil Portion)" by the respondents (MADA);
2b) Further, for a direction upon the MADA to consider the case of the petitioner and allot the same to the petitioner as the petitioner being the only eligible bidder in the tender in questions;
c) Further, for a direction upon the respondents (MADA) to stay the execution of the work allotted to respondent no. 6 in an arbitrary manner in view of the fact that the respondent no. 6 is not eligible due to lack of required/stipulated work experience as per the NIT."
3. Counsel for the respondents Mr. Kumar Rahul Kamlesh submits that this writ petition has become infructuous in view of the fact that from perusal of the notice inviting tender, it is apparent that the work was to be completed within a period of 12 months from the date of written order to commence the work and the tender is of the year, 2015-16. The work order was issued on 14.09.2015.
4. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the respondents, it appears that this writ petition has become infructuous.
5. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Pankaj