Santosh Kumar Yadav v. Union Of India

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1365 of 2016 • Santosh Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Ram Sanehi Yadav, Aged About 41 Years Transport Contractor, R/o Netaji Chowk, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Union Of India Though Its Secretary, Department Of Agriculture & Cooperation Krishi Bhawan, Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi, Delhi 110001

2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Principal Secretary, Industries Department, Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Gate Naya Raipur Capital Complex, Head Post Office Raipur, Tahsil Raipur, Civil & Revenue District Raipur, Chhattisgarh Pin 492001

3. The Chief Executive Officer, Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Bilaspur Sahkar Bhawan Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495001, Email Jskbm.bilaspur@gmail.com

4. Chairman, Board Of Directors, Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryaadit, Bilaspur, Sahkar Bhawan, Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

5. Tender Committee, Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryaadit Bilaspur, Sahkar Bhawan, Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh-495001. ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Rajkamal Singh, Advocate For Respondent No.1 :

Shri Ashwini Shukla, Advocate For Respondent No.2 :

Shri Ramakant Mishra, Dy. AG for the State For Respondent No.3 to 5 :

Shri Sanjay Patel, Advocate with Shri Jitendra Shrivastava, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 18/11/2016

1. It is not disputed before this Court that the work under the subject tender was awarded to the transporters who were already working with the respondent Bank and the work has already been completed, therefore, the

relief prayed for in the petition has been rendered infructuous.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since initially tenders were invited wherein the petitioner participated by depositing earnest money, but somehow the tender process was not completed, therefore, the respondent Bank be directed to refund the amount of earnest money deposited by the petitioner.

3. Considering the fact that the tender process was not finalized and the petitioner has not committed any violation of the terms of the tender notice, the respondent Bank is directed to refund the earnest money deposited by the petitioner within a period of one month from today.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra Ashu