The State Of Maharashtra And Others v. Prashant Nagnathrao Paldewar And Others

1 ca 8526.17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8526 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1558 OF 2014 The State of Maharashtra and others .. Applicants

Versus

Prashant Nagnathrao Paldewar and others .. Respondents Shri A. R. Kale, A.G.P. for for the Applicants/State. Shri P. V. Mandlik, Senior Advocate i/by Shri U. B. Bilolikar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1.

Shri Girish Rane, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3. Shri S. S. Rathi, Advocate for the Respondent No. 4. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1558 OF 2014 Prashant Nagnathrao Paldewar .. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others and others .. Respondents Shri P. V. Mandlik, Senior Advocate i/by Shri U. B. Bilolikar, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Shri A. R. Kale, A.G.P. for for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Shri Girish Rane, Advocate for the Respondent No. 6. Shri S. S. Rathi, Advocate for the Respondent No. 7. CORAM : S. C. DHARMADHIKARI AND MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 13TH JULY, 2017.

2 ca 8526.17 PER COURT :

.

It is stated on behalf of applicants/original respondent Nos. 1 to 4 that a decision has been taken to cancel the entire process initiated earlier. Leave is sought to commence the process afresh and in terms of new rules/regulations/scheme. 2.

After hearing both sides, we do not feel that, this Court at any time prevented the State from initiating fresh tender process as per G. R. dated 20.04.2017. There is no ad-interim or interim order in the writ petition. In the circumstances both civil application, as also writ petition are disposed of. The State is free to act in accordance with law. No costs. 3.

Needless to clarify that the successful bidder in the earlier process can initiate such proceedings as are permissible in law including for recovery of compensation/damages. [MANGESH S. PATIL, J.] [S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] bsb/July 17