Supreme Court - Daily Orders
A.B. Grain Spirits Pvt Ltd vs Government Of National Capital ... on 19 February, 2018
Bench: Rohinton Fali Nariman, Navin Sinha
1
ITEM NO.58 COURT NO.12 SECTION XIV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 5806/2018
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-02-2018
in WP(C) No. 1384/2018 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At New
Delhi)
A.B. GRAIN SPIRITS PVT LTD & ANR. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI Respondent(s)
WITH
Diary No(s). 6046/2018 (XIV)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.25512/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING
C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.25507/2018-PERMISSION TO
FILE SLP and IA No.25510/2018-PERMISSION TO FILE SLP WITHOUT
CERTIFIED/PLAIN COPY OF IMPUGNED ORDER)
Date : 19-02-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing
today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Mukul Rohtagi Sr. Adv.
Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Anil Kaushik, Adv.
Mr. Tanmaya Mehta, Adv.
Mr. Ankit Virmani, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Adv.
Ms. Binkel Singh, Adv.
Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, AOR
Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Mohit Paul, AOR
Mr. Vineet Malhotra, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
Signature Not Verified
O R D E R
Digitally signed by ASHA SUNDRIYAL Date: 2018.02.20 15:53:00 IST Reason: Permission to file Special Leave Petitions without the certified copy as well as the plain copy of the impugned order is granted.
2Permission to file Special Leave Petition in D. No. 6046/2018 is granted.
The High Court judgment appears not to have been delivered as yet though, on 13.02.2018, the High Court has indicated in its order that the Writ Petition stands dismissed. Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, submits that there are several Clusters in the City of Delhi, which is part of one single project, and states that the contention which did not find favour with the High Court is that insofar as one particular Cluster is concerned in which the Petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 are waiting to apply, the new tender has a new condition, which is that the person applying should not run buses in more than 4 Clusters. Apparently, the earlier condition qua all the Clusters in this project was a condition of 5 instead of 4 Clusters which would non suit a prospective tenderer. Mr. Rohtagi also submits that insofar as the other tenders are concerned, for the same project in other Clusters, the old condition continues.
In view of this, we issue notice and permit the petitioners to participate in the tender, which is to take place on 21.02.2018. The tender will, thereafter, continue to be processed, but will not be given effect to without the leave of this Court.
(R. NATARAJAN) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER