B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, S.B.SHUKRE
Padgilwar Agro Industries – Appellant
Versus
Director, Directorate of Sericulture, Government of Maharashtra – Respondent
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.
1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks a writ to set aside acceptance of bid of respondent no.3 by the respondent nos.1 and 2 on the ground that said respondent no.3 does not fulfill essential conditions of the tender invitation with further prayer to direct respondent nos. 1 and 2 to issue work order to the petitioner. The E-tenders were invited for Engine oriented Mulberry Pruner/ shoot/Brush cutting machine. On 13,02.2015, while issuing notice to the respondents, this Court prohibited issuance of work order. Matter has been heard finally on 27.03.2015, and considering the fact that the pruners are meant for farmers and approaching financial year end, we have passed suitable interim orders to see that the grants do not lapse.
2. Considering the nature of controversy and with consent of all the parties, we have heard the matter finally by issuing “Rule” and making it returnable forthwith. We have heard Shri R.S. Parsodkar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. B.H. Dangre, learned Government Pleader for Respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Shri A.V. Muley, learned Counsel for the Respondent no.3.
3. Shri Pa
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.