Bombay High CourtWP/2748/2018rejected at admission stage

Shri Vasantrao S/O Subhashrao Deshmukh v. The Zilla Parishad, Akola Through Its Chief Executive Officer And Another

2018-05-04Hon'Ble Shri Justice B. P. Dharmadhikari,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Arun Digambarrao Upadhye2 pages

0405wp2748.18.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.2748/2018 Shri Vasantrao s/o Subhashrao Deshmukh ...Versus...

The Zilla Parishad, Akola, through its Chief Executive Officer, Akola and another - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri A.M. Ghare, Counsel for petitioner CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND ARUN D. UPADHYE, JJ.

DATE : 04/05/2018 1.

Heard.

Submission is, petitioner had submitted a certificate dated 18/12/2015 showing his experience of similar work in tribal area. When original was demanded on 6/2/2018, he could not produce it and on 7/2/2018 he informed the authority inviting tender that original is misplaced.

Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has sought certified copy but then that certified copy is not being made available by very same office. He also submits that on the copy submitted for scanning it discloses outward number and the outward number register also supports issuance of such certificate.

Petitioner could not produce original document for inspection on 31/1/2018.

0405wp2748.18.odt 5.

Tender form submitted by him nowhere discloses that in envelope-I the experience certificate was enclosed. In petition, there is averment that tender form includes annexures and certificate dated 18/12/2015 is annexed to the tender form. 6.

Petitioner therefore seeks a direction to respondents to verify the position.

Contention is, work order is being issued to a person who is claiming much more amount while petitioner has offered 10% below the upset price. As the original could not be produced, we find that some disputed questions arise. We are therefore not inclined to intervene. Writ petition is therefore rejected. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE Wadkar