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

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN - PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JODHP
M/S RAVI MARBLE UDHYOG – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW 2879/2021



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2879/2021

M/s Ravi Marble Udhyog, Nohar Road, Tehsil Rawatsar, District

Hanumangarh Through Proprietor Banwari Lal S/o Shri Udmi

Ram, Aged 60 Years, R/o Subhash Nagar Behind Mistri Market,

Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh (Raj.)

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of

Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Of

Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

2.

The Addl. Chief Secretary, Rural Development And

Panchayati Raj Department, Rajasthan Jaipur.

3.

The Secretary Department Of Rural Development,

Rajasthan, Jaipur.

4.

The Commissioner - Egs (Mahatma Gandhi Narega) Rural

Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Of

Rajasthan, Jaipur.

5.

The District Collector, And Coordinator Mahatma Gandhi

National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme

Hanumangarh.

6.

The Chief Executive Officer Zila Parishad, Hanumangarh.

7.

The Block Development Officer Panchayat Samiti

Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. NR Budania

For Respondent(s)

:

MR. Manish Tak

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

18/03/2021

In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, abundant caution is being

taken while hearing the matters in Court.

(2 of 2)

[CW-2879/2021]

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition claiming the

following relief :-

"By an appropriate writ, order in the nature of

mandamus, the respondents may kindly be directed

to ensure the compliance of the rule 29(2)(i) of

Rajathan Transparency in Public Procurement Rule

2013 and initiate the tender process for the financial

y ear 2021-22 and same may be complete on or

before 31.03.2021 or extent the existing contract till

new contract made applicable in terms of RTPP act

2012 & RTPP Rules 2013."

At the outset, learned counsel for the respondents makes a

statement that the respondents are in agreement with the prayer

of the petitioner and shall ensure all necessary compliance of Rule

29(2)(i) of Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Rule,

2013.

In light of such limited submission made by learned counsel

for the respondents, the writ petition is disposed of.

Stay petition as well as all pending applications stand

disposed of accordingly.

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.

74-Sudheer/-

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top