M/S.Geeta Engineering ... vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr
2018 Latest Caselaw 1026 Bom

    Judgment                                                              wp4435.02


                                          1


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                              NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR


                      WRIT PETITION  NO.   4435  OF 2002.

        M/s. Geeta Engineering Company
        through its' Proprietor Mrs. Geeta 
        Nair, w/o Shri B.C.K. Nair, 
        Resident of Gikus Palace,
        119, Survey Nagar,  Nagpur.                  ...     PETITIONER.


                                      VERSUS 


1.      State of Maharashtra,
        through its Secretary, 
        Department of Public Works, 
        Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032.

2.      The Executive Engineer,
        Public Works Division No.1,
         Nagpur.                                        ...     RESPONDENTS
                                                                         .


                               ---------------------------------
                               None for the Petitioner.
                       Shri A. Chutke, A.G.P. for respondents.
                              ----------------------------------


                                     CORAM :    B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
                                                MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATED : JANUARY 25 2018

Judgment wp4435.02

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.) :

None appears for the petitioner. Learned A.G.P. is

present on behalf of respondents.

2. Writ Petition came to be filed to protect the registration of

petitioner as a Contractor and rights flowing from that registration.

The registration was valid up to 10.09.2005. Circulars dated

21.09.2000, 11.10.2001 and government resolution dated

11.02.2002, which tried to force certain compliances upon petitioner

were questioned.

3. This Court has on 12.12.2002 issued Rule in the matter

and granted interim relief in terms of prayer clause (iii).

4. That interim relief operates even today. With the result,

it has outlived the period of registration certificate. Writ Petition

has therefore, become infructuous and the same is disposed of

accordingly. Rule discharged. No costs.

                         JUDGE                           JUDGE
Rgd.