Royal Security Service, Balangir vs. State Of Orissa

Original PDF →
WP(C)/1783/2025HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01002088202506 March 2025Bench: MR. JUSTICE K.R.MOHAPATRA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA2 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Page 1 of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 1783 OF 2025 Royal Security Service, Bolangir …. Petitioner Mr. Dayanidhi Mishra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opp. Parties Mr. Umesh Chandra Behura, Additional Government Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

ORDER Order No. 06.03.2025

02.

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2.

The Petitioner has prayed for the following relief in the writ petition:

“It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit this writ application, issue notice to the opp. parties, call for the relevant record and after hearing the parties may be pleased to pass the following directives:

i) The Letter No. 3399(8) dated 18th December, 2024 under Annexure-15 may be quashed because the petitioner has already been declared as L 1 bidder as per financial bid opened in the tender; ii) To declare the subsequent selection of successful bidder in the lottery process in reference to Annexure-15 other than the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary and malafide; iii) The opp. parties may be directed to accept the GST quoted by the petitioner which is at the rate of 18% on consolidated remuneration and service charges as per government guidelines in reference to Annexure - 3 and Annexure - 6; iv) The opp. parties may be directed to issue work order to the petitioner who is the successful L-1 bidder in the tender call Notice dated 29th February, 2024 under Annexure - 1 and Annexure - 2; v) And further be pleased to pass any other order /orders, direction/directions writ /writs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.

And for such action kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray”.

3.

In course of hearing, Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that in the meantime, another person has been selected to perform the work in question ignoring the fact that the Petitioner was the L1 bidder.

4.

In view of the above, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays for withdrawal of the writ petition seeking liberty to file a fresh petition with better particulars.

5.

Granting such liberty, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn.

(K.R. Mohapatra)

Judge

(S.K. Mishra) Ranjeeta

Judge

Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.