Maa Sharda Construction v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17589 of 2015 ====================================================== Maa Sharda Construction through its partner Sri Arun Kumar Singh, Son of Sri Krishna Singh, Resident of Mohalla- New Area, Ward No-5, P.S Nagar, Distt- Aurangabad.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

The Chief Engineer, Bihar Police Building Construction Corporation, Patna. 3.

The Superintending Engineer, Bihar Police Building Construction Corporation, Patna.

4.

Ganesh Kumar, Son of not known resident of Mohalla- RMS Colony, Road No-4, Kankarbagh, P.S. Kankarbagh, District- Patna. 5.

The Principal Secretary, Home (Police) Department, Bihar, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the BPBCC :

Mr. Prasoon Sinha, Advocate For State : Mr. Manoj Kumar, AC to GP-24 Mr. Anuj Kumar, AC to GP-24 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) 04-07-2023 None appears for the petitioner.

2. Matter is of the year 2015.

3. In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):- "1. That this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s) or directions(s) to cancel the Technical Bid of Respondent No. 4 as well as Financial Bid and thereby cancel the work allotted to Respondent No. 4 in respect of

Patna High Court CWJC No.17589 of 2015(3) dt.04-07-2023 2/2 Item No. 9 of Annexure-1 (Gaya).

And further direct the Respondent to consider and grant of work of aforesaid item No. 9 of Annexure-1 to the petitioner for construction of Pre-Fabricated Hut, Bathroom and Kitchen Shed at Bodh Gaya Police Station in the district of Gaya and during the pendency of this application respondents may be restrained including Respondent No. 4 to work of item No. 9 of Annexure-1 until further order of this Court. And/Or pass such other order(s) as your Lordship may deem fit and proper."

4. There is no interim order insofar as staying further proceedings pursuant to the technical bid of 4th respondent as well as financial bid. It is reliably learnt that the 4th respondent has already executed the work. Hence, the present petition has become infructuous.

5. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed as infructuous.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J) (Jitendra Kumar, J) shoaib/- U