AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J
1) By filing this intra-court appeal, the petitioner / appellant has assailed the order dated 28.03.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge, in Writ Petition (M/S) 1150 of 2021, giving liberty to the petitioner to make a representation before the District Magistrate, and a direction to the respondent No. 3, District Magistrate, Bageshwar, to consider his request, and to pass appropriate orders for refund of money which has been forfeited by the respondents in exercise of his power under Clause 21 of the Policy.
2) Dr. Kartikey Hari Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellant, would submit that the Appellate Court may expand the scope of the enquiry that has been given to the District Magistrate, Bageshwar, to consider if the said work for which the appellant has filed the security deposit can be granted in favour of the appellant.
3) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner / appellant, we are of the opinion that such an expansion of re-consideration and representation cannot be granted as it may lead to (i) dishonesty and corrupt practices, (ii) denial of a fresh player to bid for the same work.
4) In that view of the matter, the Special Appeal is devoid of any merit. The same is, hereby, dismissed.
Interim Relief Application (IA No. 01 of 2022) also stands disposed of.