Gurtej Singh And ANR v. Sbi And ORS
C.W.P. No. 7540 of 2024 2024:PHHC:045858-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.W.P. No. 7540 of 2024 Date of decision: 04.04.2024 Gurtej Singh and another .... Petitioners Vs.
State Bank of India and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Present:
Mr. Dilpreet Singh Gandhi, Advocate for the petitioners.
ARUN PALLI, J (Oral) The petitioners have prayed for the following substantive relief: "Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India for the issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction especially in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to follow the norms mentioned in the tender and to declare the result of the technical bid in public domain which is otherwise declared as per the RTI reply filed by the respondent and further seeking directions to respondents to not to adopt the pick-n-chose method for allowing the tender in favour of some specific person who do not comply with the terms and conditions as mentioned in the tender notice numbering RBO/2-BTI/2023-24/BS/1.
It is further prayed before this Hon'ble Court seeking issuance of direction to the respondents to decide the representation/legal notice (Annexure P-7) sent by the petitioners."
At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that prior to the institution of this petition, the petitioners had even served the DEEPAK KUMAR 2024.04.05 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document P & H High Court, Chandigarh
C.W.P. No. 7540 of 2024 2024:PHHC:045858-DB respondent authorities with a legal notice dated 07.03.2024 (P-8), but to no avail.
Served with advance copy of the petition, Mr. Akshay Jain, Advocate, is present in Court on behalf of respondents. At the outset, he submits, for the competent authority is already in seisin of the matter, it would be expedient if the petition is disposed of, at this stage, to enable the competent authority to deal with the concerns/grievances of the petitioners. And pass necessary orders, on their legal notice (ibid) in accordance with law, within three weeks from today. He submits that before any such order is passed, the petitioners would also be heard. Learned counsel for petitioners is agreeable to the course suggested by the learned counsel for the respondents and submits that let this petition be disposed of in view of the statement made by him. In the wake of the position sketched out above, this petition is disposed of in terms of the statement made by learned counsel for the parties.
This Court is sanguine that the authorities shall consider/examine the matter in the right earnest, and pass appropriate orders, within the time indicated by learned counsel for the respondents, assigning reasons in support thereof.
Needless to assert that this order shall not constitute an expression of opinion on the merits of the case of either party, for, as indicated earlier, the competent authority shall examine the grievances of the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law.
(ARUN PALLI) JUDGE (VIKRAM AGGARWAL) JUDGE 04.04.2024 deepak Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes/No Whether reportable :
Yes/No DEEPAK KUMAR 2024.04.05 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document P & H High Court, Chandigarh