J.K. Engicon Private Limited having its head Office at Hathua Chhawani, Chatardhari v. The State of Bihar through teh Additional Chief Secretary, Road
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
present petition stands disposed of, reserving liberty to the
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. Pending I.A. stands disposed of. (P. B. Bajanthri, J) ( Jitendra Kumar, J) Amrendra/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date
Judgment
Vikash Kumar Singh Son of Jitendra Singh Resident of barwa Khurd, P.S. Daudpur, District-Saran, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus The State of Bihar through teh Additional Chief Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. The Additional Chief Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. The Engineer-in-Chief (Work Management), Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. Road Construction The Committee for Evaluation of Technical Bid (RCD) through the Chief Engineer (North), Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. The Chief Engineer (North), Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. The Superintending Engineer, Road Construction Department, Saran Road Circle, Hajipur, Bihar. The Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Road Division, Siwan, Bihar. ... ... Respondent/s : :
Mr.Prashant Kumar Mr.Manoj Kr. Ambastha (Sc26) ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s For the Respondent/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) Date : 13-07-2023 In the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-
i.) For issuance of an appropriate writ, Patna High Court CWJC No.3710 of 2023 dt.13-07-2023 order or direction in the nature of Certiorari for quashing of and setting aside the Memo No. 2704 dated 21.12.2022 (Annexure - 3) issued by the Committee for evaluation of Technical Bid in relation to NIT No. 02/2022-23, RCD Road Division, Swan whereby the Petitioner Company was technically disqualified from participating in the financial bid. ii.) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents concerned to consider the Petitioner's bid for the purpose of participation into the financial bid in relation to NIT No. 02/2022-23, RCD, Road Division, Siwan. iii.) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction interdicting the Respondents from holding the financial bid round in relation to NIT No. 02/2022-23, RCD, Road Division, Siwan during the pendency of the present writ application before this Hon'ble Court. iv.) For issuance of any other appropriate writ/ writes, order/orders, direction/ directions for which the writ petitioner would be found entitled under the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. The impugned Memo No. 2704 dated 21.12.2022 (Annexure - 3) is in the form of show cause asking the petitioner’s and others objection, if any. In stead of pursuing the objection, the petitioner has rushed to this Court. Therefore, the writ petition is, prima facie, premature. Patna High Court CWJC No.3710 of 2023 dt.13-07-2023
During pendency of the present writ petition, the petitioner’s objection to technical bid evaluation has been considered and rejected on 24.01.2023. Therefore, the petitioner has fresh cause of action.
Accordingly, the petitioner is permitted to file a fresh petition insofar as challenging the order dated
24.01.2023.
Operative part
In view of these facts and circumstances, the present petition stands disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to assail the technical evaluation committee’s decision dated 24.01.2023 by which the petitioner’s objection has been rejected.
Pending I.A. stands disposed of. (P. B. Bajanthri, J) ( Jitendra Kumar, J) Amrendra/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date
18.07.2023
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.