Amit Kadyan And Ors. vs. State Of Haryana And Another
Held
The Court held that the writ petition had become infructuous. The primary relief sought by the petitioners was to restrain the respondents from opening the financial bid. As the financial bid had already been opened on March 7, 2019, the purpose of the writ petition, as originally conceived, was no longer achievable. Therefore, the Court found no reason to proceed with the adjudication of the merits of the petition. The Court did not decide on any other issues, including the alleged variation in rates or the inquiry by the State Vigilance Bureau, as the petition was dismissed on the ground of being infructuous.
Facts
The petitioners filed a writ petition seeking a certiorari to quash a notice inviting tender dated February 7, 2019, issued by the State of Haryana for taking 190 buses on lease. The petition was initially ordered to be heard with another writ petition concerning the registration of buses and implementation of agreements. The respondents filed a reply and an additional affidavit stating that the financial bid for the 190 buses had already been opened on March 7, 2019. It was noted that the average rate quoted in this bid was Rs. 27/- per Km, whereas in a previous bid for 510 buses, the average rate was between Rs. 31.01 to Rs. 37.30 paise, including GST. Due to this rate variation, the matter was referred to the State Vigilance Bureau for an inquiry.
Key Issues
1. Whether the present writ petition has become infructuous, given that the financial bid for the lease of 190 buses has already been opened, which was the primary relief sought by the petitioners at the time of filing the petition. Petitioner's contention: The petitioners argued that their primary concern when filing the writ petition was to prevent the opening of the financial bid. Since the financial bid has now been opened, the writ petition has become infructuous. Revenue/State's contention: The respondents filed a reply and an additional affidavit informing the Court that the financial bid had been opened. No specific argument was recorded for the respondents regarding the maintainability of the petition beyond this factual submission.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
108 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 4803 of 2019 (O&M)
Date of Decision:13.05.2019 Amit Kadyan and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present: Mr. Amit Jhanji, Advocate
for the petitioners. Mr. Ankur Mittal, Additional, A.G. Haryana. **** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL)
This petition is filed for seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned notice inviting tender dated 07.02.2019 (Annexure P-14) issued by the respondents for taking 190 buses on lease. Although, vide order dated 22.02.2019, this writ petition was ordered to be heard along with CWP No.1947 of 2018 in which mandamus is being sought by the petitioners therein for the purpose of seeking a direction to the respondents therein for registration of buses and implementation of the agreements but in this writ petition the respondents have filed their reply on 27.02.2019 and also an additional affidavit of Ashwani Kumar Dogra, Deputy Transport Controller by which the Court has informed that the financial
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.