Patna High CourtCWJC/12958/2013dismissed

Santosh Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-08-21Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12958 of 2013 =========================================================== Santosh Kumar Singh, son of Chandrama Singh, resident of Village- Jalwain, P.O- Mujradh, P.S- Kargahar, District- Rohtas 800013, Presently residing at C/O Satya Narayan Singh, Road No. 7, Quarter No. C/5, R- Block, Patna- 800001. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

2. The Secretary, Ministry of Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. Director, District Mid Day Meal (MDM), Programme Committee, Patna, Bihar.

4. District Magistrate (D.M), Patna District- Patna, Bihar.

5. Officer-in-Charge, Mid Day Meal Programme (MDM), Patna. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : None For the Respondents : Mr. Manoj Kumar, AC to SC 5 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 21-08-2018 The present writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents not to proceed with the allotment of tenders for transportation of food grains in Mid-day Meal Project, Patna without giving opportunity to this petitioner; and further for direction to the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation dated 04.06.2013 (Annexure-6).

2. None appears on behalf of the petitioner despite repeated calls.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the writ petition, inviting reference to paragraphs 9 and 10 of the counter affidavit in which it has been stated that the tender of the tenderers

Patna High Court CWJC No.12958 of 2013 dt.21-08-2018 2/2 was opened in the meeting of the Tender Committee and some contractors had offered the agreement paper of some vehicle for more than one block which was contrary to Clause 9 of the terms and conditions of the tender. The tender of the petitioner was rejected on this ground along with six other such candidates.

4. Having regard to the stand of the respondents in the counter affidavit which has not been controverted and no rejoinder thereto has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, this Court finds the writ petition to be devoid of merit which is accordingly dismissed. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 25.08.2018 Transmission Date N.A.