Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
B.R.SARANGI, B.P.SATAPATHY
Dinakrushna Pattanaik – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dispute regarding sand quarry bidding process. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments against acceptance of second highest bid. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. observations on authority's adherence to tender rules. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. legal guidance on powers of authorities in bidding. (Para 9) |
| 5. consequences of issuing form-f and compliance with rules. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 6. statutory powers must not serve arbitrary interests. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 28) |
| 7. judicial review ensures accountability in contractual matters. (Para 30) |
| 8. negotiation resolutions regarding bid acceptance. (Para 34) |
| 9. conclusion and directive for future action. (Para 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT :
B.R. SARANGI, J.
The petitioner, who is one of the bidders, by means of this writ petition, seeks to quash the order dated 07.07.2021 passed in Touzi Misc. Case No.6 of 2021, by which opposite party no.3-Sub-Collector, Talcher has dismissed the said appeal filed by the petitioner under Rule-46(1) of ODISHA MINOR MINERAL CONCESSION RULES , 2016 (for short “OMMC Rules, 2016”), and further to issue direction to opposite party no.3 to cancel the lease granted to opposite party no.5- Banambar Bhutia in respect of Gopinathpur Sand Quarry an
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
