Baskit Rai v. The Union Of India And ORS
Patna High Court CWJC No.10936 of 2012 dt.16-05-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10936 of 2012 =========================================================== Baskit Rai Son Of Late Suresh Rai, Resident Of Village and P.O. - Dighi Kala Purbi, Police Station - Sadar - Hajipur, District - Vaishali (Hajipur) .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union Of India Through Chairman Railway Board, Ministry Of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. The Deputy Director Traffic(G)-Ii, Railway Board Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
3. The General Manager, East Central Railway, Hazipur
4. The Divisional Rail Manager (D.R.M.), East Central Railway, Sonepur Division, Sonepur, District - Saran
5. The Chief Commercial Manager, East Central Railway, Hazipur
6. The Senior Divisional Rail Manager (Commercial), East Central Railway, Sonepur Division, Sonepur, District - Saran
7. The Divisional Rail Manager (Commercial) East Central Railway Sonepur Division, Sonepur, District - Saran .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mahesh Prasad, Adv. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 16-05-2016 Despite repeated calls no one appears on behalf of the petitioner.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 16.05.2012 contained in letter no. C/536/Cycle-cum-Scooter/Hajipur/2010 issued under the signature of Divisional Rail Manager (Commercial) Sonepur Division, Sonepur under East Central Railway (E.C.R.); and for quashing of Tender Notice published in daily newspaper Hindustan on 23.05.2012 which is said to be published in terms of letter dated 16.05.2012 for the purpose of allotment of a new Cycle-cum-Scooter (Motor Cycle) Stand in the premises of Hazipur Railway Station of Sonepur Division under East Central Railway.
Patna High Court CWJC No.10936 of 2012 dt.16-05-2016
3. At the very outset, it is noticed that the tender dated 07.09.2010 awarded in favour of the petitioner was only for a period of three years which has since elapsed. So also the advertisement dated 23.05.2012 pursuant to the impugned letter dated 16.05.2012 contemplated award of work for only 90 days which has also since elapsed.
4. In that view of the matter, the prayer in the writ petition has been rendered infructuous by efflux of time and no positive relief can be granted at this belated stage.
5. The application is accordingly dismissed as having become infructuous.
(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 17.05.2016 Transmission Date