High CourtsDivision Bench(2026) 10 UK CK 0298

M/s Aroma Health Care vs State Of Uttarakhand & Ors.

Uttarakhand High Court, Nainital · Decided on 5 October 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J · Subhash Upadhyay, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (M/B) No. 829 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 266 words

(per Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)

1.

The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the notice inviting tender dated 11.09.2026, in respect of laboratory services under the free Diagnostic Services Initiative (FDSI).

2.

The case of the petitioner is that as per NIT, the bidder may seek clarification in respect of any term and condition of the RFP and, in such an event, NHM is bound to respond in writing or by standard electronic means to the query of the bidder. The case of the petitioner is that it had submitted an application on 19.09.2026 seeking clarifications in respect of the RFP while pointing out various contradictions therein, however, the same has not been responded to by the 1 NHM.

3.

Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 2 & 3 states that the pre-bid meetings are going on and NHM has already responded to queries of some of the bidders. He states that the clarifications sought by the petitioner by its application dated 19.09.2026 are under consideration and the same shall also be suitably responded to. He further submits that the deadline for submission of the proposal has been extended to 17th October, 2026 and he states that before the said date, the NHM would respond to the clarifications sought by the petitioner vide its letter dated 19.09.2026.

4.

In view of the aforesaid stand of learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 & 3, we are of the opinion that the present writ petition is premature and is accordingly dismissed.

5.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.