March 27 vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 2450 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

March 27 vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 27 March, 2026

                                                                2026:UHC:2173-DB


 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA

                                     AND

    THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY

                  Writ Petition (M/B) No.173 of 2026
                                March 27, 2026


  Shubharambh Services & Anr.                                ----Petitioners

                                      Versus

  State of Uttarakhand & Others                              ----Respondents

  ------------------------------------------------------------------
  Presence:-
  Mr. D.S. Patni, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Tribhuwan Phartiyal and Mr.
  Dharmendra Barthwal, learned counsel for the petitioners
  Mr. Yogesh Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for the State/respondent no.1
  Mr. Lalit Miglani, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3
  Mr. Sahil Mullick, learned counsel for respondent no.4 through Video Conferencing



  JUDGMENT :

(per Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta C. J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ petition has been filed questioning

the settlement of contract by the respondents - Municipal

Corporation for supply of manpower vide work order dated

11.03.2026 in favour of respondent no.4. The petitioners

have questioned the experience certificate of respondent

no.4.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent

nos.2 and 3 has raised a preliminary objection in respect of

the locus of the petitioners to challenge the work order and

2026:UHC:2173-DB

award of contract in favour of respondent no.4. It is

submitted that the petitioners have not participated in the

tender process and, therefore, they have no locus.

4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioners submits that the petitioners participated in the

previous tender exercise but it was later on cancelled. He

admits that this time the petitioners have not submitted any

bid, though it is stated that it was for the reason that the

petitioners did not qualify the condition relating to experience

imposed by respondent nos.2 and 3 while issuing the tender

notice in question.

5. Be that as it may, since it is admitted that the

petitioners have not submitted any bid in pursuance of the e-

tender notice dated 15.12.2025, therefore, we are of the

considered opinion that the petitioners do not have any locus

to challenge the award of contract in favour of respondent

no.4.

6. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

(MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.)

(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 27.03.2026 Rajni

RAJINI UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db4 8448ac3701a9ae475a2547e4b7f1d9b

1f17d01342, postalCode=263001,

GUSAIN st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2222 B4DF4FC80D4557562F95BEBA013F53 0616A158A0A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN Date: 2026.03.27 16:26:52 +05'30'