Patna High Court
Geeta Enterprises vs The State Of Bihar on 3 March, 2025
Author: Partha Sarthy
Bench: Partha Sarthy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2507 of 2025
======================================================
Geeta Enterprises a proprietorship firm having its place of business at C- 24
Narayan, Vihar Colony, Bikaner, Bikaner, Rajasthan- 334001 through its
authorised signatory namely Netram Male aged about 34 years, Son of Tiloka
Ram, resident of Ward No.- 05, Khoda, P.S.- Rawat Sir, District-
Hanumangarh, Rajasthan- 335524.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
Mines and Geology, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Govt. of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate cum Collector, Madhubani.
4. The Principal Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
5. The Mines Inspector cum Competent Authority, Madhubani, (Cluster No.-
1).
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Gautam Kumar Kejriwal, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kr. Singh, GP26
For the Mining : Mr. Naresh Dikshit, Advocate
Ms. Kalpana, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 03-03-2025
The petitioner has challenged the order dated
19.11.2024issued under the signature of respondent No.3/District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Madhubani whereby the earnest money deposited by the petitioner against participation in the tender process for settlement we direct that in case the petitioner prefers an appeal before the Patna High Court CWJC No.2507 of 2025 dt.03-03-2025 2/3 of sandghats was forfeited and the letter of acceptance was revoked. The petitioner has also been debarred from participating in future tenders for a period of two years.
2. It appears that the process of excavation of sand could not be started for the reason of absence of sand and only presence of silt in the sandghat settled with the petitioner, for which he was the highest bidder.
3. Though Clause 42 sub-Clause-XIX of the tender document clearly stipulates that bidders would be required to conduct a technical investigation before participating in the bid, but considering the fact that the order impugned does not address this factual issue raised, we direct that in case the petitioner prefers an appeal before the Mining Commissioner under the provisions contained in Section 67 (2) of the Bihar Minerals (concession, Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2019 within a period of two weeks, the appellate authority shall, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, pass a reasoned we direct that in case the petitioner prefers an appeal before the Patna High Court CWJC No.2507 of 2025 dt.03-03-2025 3/3 order within the statutory time period, as the petitioner has been visited with debarment order for two years.
4. With the aforenoted observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
(Ashutosh Kumar, ACJ)
( Partha Sarthy, J)
Harsh/ Sunil
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE N.A
Uploading Date 05.03.2025
Transmission Date