Patna High CourtCWJC/3660/2013dismissed

M/S Saveer Biotech Limited v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-08-02Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3660 of 2013 =========================================================== M/s Saveer Biotech Limited, through its Director Sudan Netr Paul having its Registered Office At: 1442, Wazir Nagar, Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi - 110003 .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through its Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Forest, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

4. The Secretary, Department of Forest, Government of Bihar, Patna

5. The Chief Conservator of Forest-Cum-Nodal Officer (FC), Bihar, Patna, 1st Floor, N.H. Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna - 800015, Bihar

6. Shri Shiv Shankar Chaudhary, IFS, the Chief Conservator of Forest-CumNodal Officer (FC), 1st Floor, N.H. Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna - 800015, Bihar

7. M/s Sheel Biotech Ltd. having its Office at RZ-2705/30, Sheel House, Main Jagdamba Road, Tughlakabad Extension, New Delhi - 110019 .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner : Mr. RATNESH KUMAR SINGH For the Respondents : AAG4 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 02.08.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to allot the tender no. State CAMPA Bihar MN/APO (201011)/1 dated 25.05.2011 published vide Advertisement No. PR-1703 (Forest) 11-12 dated 25.05.2011 in favour of the petitioner; to declare the issuance of LOI in favour of respondent no. 6 to be null and void; and for award of compensation to the petitioner.

Patna High Court CWJC No.3660 of 2013 dt. 02-08-2016

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the respondents states that the work in question in terms of the tender has since already been completed. This fact has not been disputed by the petitioner.

4. In the above view of the matter therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner with regard to allotment of tender in favour of the petitioner or for setting aside issuance of LOI in favour of respondent no. 6.

5. As regards prayer for award of compensation claimed by the petitioner this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits of compensation, which the petitioner may agitate before such forum as may be available to it in accordance with law.

6. The writ petition stands dismissed with the aforesaid observation.

(Vikash Jain, J) Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 03.08.2016 Transmission Date NA