Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.30 seconds)

Nandkumar Infrastructure Llp Thr. Poa ... vs The Superintendent Engineer National ... on 24 June, 2025

In Ram & Sham Company vs. State of Haryana 7 the Apex Court has recognized the principle of rebidding between the two contesting parties for the purpose of ensuring that the tendering authority achieves best rates. Since both Petitioner and Respondent No.4 are willing to renegotiate their financial bids, Respondent Nos.1 to 3 shall, after opening the financial bid of the Petitioner, invite both the parties for negotiations and award the contract to the party quoting the lowest rates.
Bombay High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Kanwarjit Singh Kakkar vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 26 September, 2018

[7]. Learned counsel for the petitioner by referring to N.P. Jain vs. State of Haryana and others, 1996(1) S.C.T. 713; Om Parkash vs. UHBVNL and others, 2013(3) S.C.T. 649 and Dr. B.C. Bansal vs. State of Haryana, 2002(6) SLR 502 submitted that the delay in computing pension was not attributed to the petitioner and the commutation of pension cannot be denied at the time of retirement on the ground of pendency of criminal case which was found to be false as the petitioner was acquitted thereafter.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - R M Singh - Full Document

(O&M) Puran Etc. vs Hy State. on 17 April, 2026

4. Aggrieved, the appellants approached this Court vide CWP No. 2368 of 1975, titled as Jaila Ram and others versus State of Haryana and others. The said writ petition was disposed off vide order dated 19.11.1982. The respondent i.e., the State of Haryana, was directed not to evict the appellants except in accordance with law. It was further ordered that no action be taken against the appellants without affording them adequate opportunity of hearing.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - P Jain - Full Document
1