[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
Rajpal Singh Chauhan And Others. ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 19 February, 2026
2026:UHC:1117-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA
19TH FEBRUARY, 2026
WRIT PETITION (MB) No. 611 OF 2024
Rajpal Singh Chauhan and others. ...Petitioners.
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others. ...Respondents
Counsel for the petitioners : Sri Devang Dobhal, learned counsel.
Counsel for the respondents : Sri Pooran Singh Bisht, learned
Additional Chief Standing Counsel for
the State of Uttarakhand.
Sri S.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for
respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4.
JUDGMENT :
(Per Sri Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)
1. The present writ petition has been filed praying for
quashing of two tenders of even date 07.09.2024, whereby bids
were invited by Uttarakhand Peyjal Sansadhan Vikas Evam Nirman
Nigam for renovation and upgradation work at Government
Ayurvedic Hospital Chillar, Chakrata, Dehradun at an estimated
cost of work of Rs. 44 Lacs and renovation and upgradation work
at Government Ayurvedic Hospital, Nagthat, Kalsi, Dehradun at an
estimated cost of Rs. 36.24 Lacs and also for quashing of the
Letter of Acceptance dated 14.10.2024 given in favour of
respondent Nos. 6 & 7 and another Work Order dated 18.10.2024
also in favour of the same respondents.
2. On 03.01.2025, a Co-ordinate Bench passed the
following order:-
"Mr. Devang Dobhal, learned counsel for the
petitioners.
2026:UHC:1117-DB
2. Mr. Sunil Khaira, learned Deputy Advocate General for
the State/respondent nos.1 & 5.
3. Ms. Mamta Bisht, learned counsel holding brief of Mr.
Shailendra Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for respondent
nos.2, 3 & 4.
4. Uttarakhand Peyjal Sansadhan Vikas Evam Nirman
Nigam invited bids for two different civil works. According to
petitioners, for the first work, as many as 35 bidders
submitted online bid, while in respect of second work, 33
bidders submitted online bids. However, out of those 35/33
bidders, only 3/4 persons were considered for award of
contract and the bids submitted by other bidders were
cancelled on the ground that offline bids were not submitted
by them.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn our
attention to Tender Summary Reports, which are enclosed as
annexure-10 & 11 to the writ petition.
6. Perusal of those reports reveals that bids submitted by
majority of bidders got rejected only on the ground that
physical documents were not submitted.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners went to submit offline bids along with all
necessary documents, however, they were prevented from
submitting offline bids/documents by few persons who were
sitting outside the office of respondent no.3. He refers to the
complaints made to Project Manager on 08.10.2024, which is
on record, as annexure-7 to the writ petition.
8. Thus, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
officers of Uttarakhand Peyjal Nigam have defrauded public
exchequer in collusion with certain contractors.
9. Let counsel for Uttarakhand Peyjal Nigam get
necessary instructions in the matter by 06.01.2025.
10. Put up on 08.01.2025 as fresh.
11. Till the next date of listing, it is directed that further
proceedings pursuant to the work order issued by
Uttarakhand Peyjal Nigam shall remain stayed."
3. Thereafter, a withdrawal application was filed by the
petitioners stating that they have entered into a compromise with
the private respondents. The withdrawal application was rejected
by this Court by order dated 18.02.2025, which is as follows:-
"Mr. Devang Dobhal, learned counsel for the
petitioners.
2. Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Standing Counsel for the
State.
3. Withdrawal application is preferred by the petitioners.
In Paragraph No.3 of the application, it is deposed that the
2026:UHC:1117-DB
petitioners and respondents have settled their dispute
outside the Court and they have entered into compromise,
implying thereby, some gain having been accrued to the
petitioners.
4. The institution of the Court cannot be used as platform
to arm-twist and to extract gratification.
5. This Court by order dated 03.01.2025 passed the
interim order after recording that the Uttarakhand Peyjal
Sansadhan Vikas Evam Nirman Nigam in collusion with
certain contractors has defrauded the public exchequer.
6. In that view, we reject the withdrawal application with
costs of Rs.1.00 Lakh to be deposited into the account of the
Uttarakhand State Legal Services Authority, within ten days,
failing which, the Registrar General shall initiate appropriate
action for recovery of the same, including contempt.
Respondent no.1 shall produce the record.
7. List this matter on 10.03.2025."
4. Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of respondent
Nos. 2, 3 & 4, states that the petitioners have deposited cost of Rs.
1 Lac as directed by the previous order.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners is present, but he
has not advanced any argument in support of the grounds taken in
the writ petition.
6. As the petitioners have already been directed to deposit
the cost of Rs. 1 Lac for having abused the process of this Court
and which amount has already been deposited, therefore, we are
of the considered opinion that in absence of any person to press
the grounds raised in the writ petition, it would be a futile exercise
to proceed with the matter.
7. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed.
2026:UHC:1117-DB
8. The interim order dated 03.01.2025 shall stand vacated.
9. Pending application, if any, also stands dismissed.
_____________________
MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.
___________________
ALOK MAHRA, J.
Dt: 19th February, 2026
Rathour
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH
PRAVINDRA
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=23699ccc2fd40ad81b6fd13323779d9e3aeb10
97d17dbb53d481cabd25946eed, postalCode=263001,
SINGH RATHOUR
st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=1F65499E931DF71CDAF92A40CC6179B
8E010331BA695239171F906FD5C45C4E8,
cn=PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR
Date: 2026.02.19 17:49:34 +05'30'
