SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(Pat) 1195

AFTAB ALAM
Ranjit Kumar Ghosh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

Aftab Alam, J.

1. Among the countless things that the Election Commission needs for the proper conduct of elections in this the largest democracy of the world, indelible ink is one. It is used for putting a mark on the index finger of the voter at the time of casting vote in order to ensure that no voter should exercise-his franchise more than once. The Commission seems to know exactly what it needs and where to get it from." As the time comes for holding an election, it buys indelible ink in required quantity and in suitable packages from a particular source.

2. The petitioner is the proprietor of a unit called, Bihar Ink Company which is engaged in manufacture of indelible ink for the past 40 years. The petitioner views the purchase of indelible ink by the Commission purely as a commercial transaction and resents his being kept out of this particular piece of business. The petitioner seeks to challenge the restrictive clause in the tender notice issued by the State Election Commission, Bihar, that required the tenderer to have the know-how transferred from/licensed by the National Research Development Corporation, New Delhi for the manufacture of indelible ink.

3. Seeking























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top