M/S Laxmi Trading Company Through Its Proprietor Alka Popatlal Doshi v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

(1) W. P. No. 12302 of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

Writ Petition No. 12302 of 2015 District : Beed M/s. Laxmi Trading Company, Through its proprietor, Alka w/o. Popatlal Doshi, Age : 60 years, Occupation : Business, R/o. Gut No. 8, Subhash Road, Beed, Taluka & District : Beed.

.. Petitioner.

versus

1. The State of Maharashtra, Social Justice and Special Assistance Department, Through its Secretary, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

2. The Social Justice and Special Assistance Department, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, Through its Regional Deputy Commissioner, Social Welfare, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad.

3. The Assistant Commissioner, Social Welfare, Beed, Taluka & District : Beed.

.. Respondents.

.........................

Mr. S.P. Katneshwarkar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. V.H. Dighe, Asst. Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1 to 3.

(2) W. P. No. 12302 of 2015 ..........................

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA & A.M. BADAR, JJ.

DATE : 11TH JANUARY 2016 PER COURT :

1.

We have heard Mr. Katneshwarkar, the learned for the petitioner and Mr. Dighe, the learned Asst. Government Pleader for respondents.

2.

Mr. Dighe, the learned Asst. Government Pleader, on instructions submits that as far as relief claimed in prayer clause "B" is concerned, the same does not survive as the Government has stayed the ETender process. 3.

As far as prayer clause "D" is concerned, the learned Asst. Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is being given a letter that the amount of the Demand Draft is not encashed and the said amount of Demand Draft is lying in the account of the petitioner only and the original Demand Draft would be returned back to the petitioner. The learned Asst. Government Pleader further submits that the policy has now undergone change and fresh tenders will have to be issued as per the fresh policy.

4.

Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, it would not be appropriate to entertain the petition as far as prayer clause "D" is concerned. As far as prayer clause "B" is concerned, the learned Asst.

(3) W. P. No. 12302 of 2015 Government Pleader has already made a statement that the process of ETender has been stayed by the Government. 5.

In the light of above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

( A.M. BADAR ) ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA ) JUDGE JUDGE ................................

puranik / WP12302.15