Patna High CourtCWJC/9300/2015dismissed

Shailendra Rai v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-12-17Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9300 of 2015 ====================================================== Shailendra Rai Son of Bashisth Rai Partner of M/s B Rai resident of Gupteshwar Complex Bekar Bandh P.S.- Dhanbad District- Dhanbad (Jharkhand) ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary Department of Building Construction, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Chief Engineer (South) Building Construction Department, Bihar, Patna

3. The Superintending Engineer Building Construction Circle, Gaya

4. The Executive Engineer, Building Construction Division Gaya

5. The Executive Engineer, Building construction Division Sasaram ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

None For the Respondents :

Mr. Ajay Bihari Sinha, GA 8 Mr. Neeraj Raj, AC to GA 8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 17-12-2018 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order contained in memo no. 665 dated 16.05.2015 issued by the Executive Engineer, Building Construction Division, Rohtas by which he has debarred the petitioner's firm i.e. M/s B. Rai from participating in future tenders; for quashing the consequential actions/orders by which the respondent authorities have held the petitioner's firm disqualified in respect of tender no. 13/BCD/Gaya 2014-2015 as non responsive in technical bid evaluation; for quashing of the notice inviting tender dated 30.05.2015 in respect of construction of Government Polytechnic Building at Tekari Makhdumpur and for connected reliefs.

Patna High Court CWJC No.9300 of 2015 dt.17-12-2018 2/2

2. As none appeared on behalf of the petitioner the matter was passed over for a few cases. However, on repeat call the petitioner was again not represented.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the writ petition has become infructuous by efflux of time as the period of contract was for two years which has since elapsed.

4. The writ petition accordingly stands dismissed. BT/Chandran (Vikash Jain, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 19.12.2018 Transmission Date N.A.