AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.
I.A. Nos. 3239, 3270, 3271, 3273 and 3274 of 2007 in W.P. (C) No. 4991 of 2007
In these interlocutory applications, the applicants claimed to be the persons, in whose favor work order(s) has been issued and in the writ petition, the tender process, whereby, work order has been issued, has been challenged on several grounds.
According to the applicants, they are interested persons and, as such, their presence in the writ petition [W.P.(C) No. 4991 of 2007] is necessary for complete adjudication of the controversies, involved in the writ petition, and in order to safeguard their interest.
Mr. Mittal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, admits that the said applicants are the persons, in whose favor work order(s) have been issued in the tender process, which has been challenged in the writ petition and it has not been denied that the applicants are the interested persons.
Considering the above, all the above interlocutory applications are allowed and the applicants in the above interlocutory applications are permitted to be added as party respondents.
W.P.(C) Nos. 4991 and 5216 of 2007:
Mr. Sumit Gadodia, J.C. to learned Advocate General, prays for some time to file supplementary counter-affidavit, explaining the position as to how the interest of the Small Scale Industries shall be safeguarded, in view of the Industrial Policy.
Prayer is allowed. Put up these cases under the same heading on Monday (10.12.2007) at 2.30 p.m. Let a copy of this order be handed over to Mr. Sumit Gadodia, J.C. to learned Advocate General, for needful.