WPMS/146/2018
2021 Latest Caselaw 1721 UK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                   AT NAINITAL
         ON THE 24TH DAY OF MAY, 2021
                        BEFORE:
 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI


     WRIT PETITION (M/S) No. 146 of 2018

BETWEEN:

M/s Jaiveer Bhadreshwar
Construction and others.                       ...Petitioners
     (By Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate)

AND:
Chief Executive Officer, Uttarakhand
Rural Road and others.                      ...Respondents
     (By Mr. T.S. Phartiyal, Additional C.S.C. and Mr. V.P.
     Khanduri, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand)


                      JUDGMENT

By means of this writ petition, petitioners have challenged the Letter of Acceptance dated 19.12.2017 issued by respondent no. 4 in favour of respondent no. 5.

2. A perusal of the writ petition indicates that petitioners had participated in the tender process for execution of Dugadda-Koti motor road in the year 2017. The Superintending Engineer had accepted the bid submitted by respondent no. 5 and contract was awarded to respondent no. 5. Since technical bid submitted by the petitioners was rejected, therefore, their technical bid was not opened. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioners have approached this Court seeking following relief:

"a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari to call for the record and to quash/set-aside of impugned Letter of Acceptance dated 19.12.2017 passed by the respondent no.-4, whereby, the Letter of Acceptance for execution of the Dugadda-Koti Motor Road (Jhinjhanisain) to Jaker M/R Stage-I, Package No. UT-11-14 has been issued in favour of the respondent no.-5, filed as Annexure No.-1;"

3. Learned Additional C.S.C. submits that since there was no interim order passed in the writ petition, therefore, contract was awarded to respondent no. 5 and the construction of the road is nearing completion.

4. Since this writ petition was filed in the year 2018 and, subsequent to filing of writ petition, contract was awarded to respondent no. 5 and the work of construction of the road is nearing completion, therefore, the relief, as claimed in the writ petition, cannot be granted at this belated stage. In other words, the relief, as claimed in the writ petition, does not survive.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.) Arpan