High CourtsSingle Bench(2022) 06 BOM CK 0008

Sandipan Sarjerao Pawar And Others vs State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Others

Bombay High Court · Decided on 4 June 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sandipkumar C. More, J
CASE NUMBER
908 Writ Petition No.5604, 5606 Of 2022

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

7 paragraphs · 386 words

Sandipkumar C. More, J

1.

Heard learned Senior counsel Mr. Hon and Mr. Jarare, learned counsel for the respective petitioners and also heard Mr. Kale, learned AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and learned counsel Mr. Suryawanshi for respondent No. 5 who is present before the Court.

2.

The respondent No. 4 though duly served but nobody appeared on behalf of it. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the bids invited under the impugned notice are to be opened today itself. However, both of them pointed out that one similar petition bearing Writ Petition No. 6257 of 2017 is already pending in this Court wherein by order dated 4th May, 2017, this Court (Coram : R. M. Borde and K. L. Wadane, JJ) had directed that the tender process initiated as mentioned in that petition at the instance of concerned respondent No. 5 may proceed, but the letter of acceptance of the bids should not be issued.

3.

The learned AGP pointed out that since the respondent No. 4 is already restricted by the aforesaid order, there is no propriety in granting similar order in this petition for fresh tender. It appears that despite the earlier order dated 4th May, 2017 in the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 6257 of 2017 again fresh tenders are invited at this stage by respondent No. 4.

4.

The learned counsels for the petitioners submitted that respondent No. 5-Deogiri Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana has already deposited the amount around Rs.41 Crore before the DRT, Aurangabad and therefore, there is no need to sell the properties of respondent No. 5 or to lease the same by respondent No. 4 at this juncture. On perusal of the impugned notice it appears that the bids are going to open today itself. However, in view of the earlier order dated 4th May, 2017 in Writ Petition No. 6257 of 2017, I am of the opinion that similar order can be passed in the instant matter strictly for limited period. As such the tender process initiated under the impugned notice dated 5th May, 2022 may proceed as initiated by respondent No. 4 but the letter of acceptance of the bids shall not be issued till 9th June, 2022.

5.

Stand over to 9th June, 2022

6.

Parties to act upon authenticated copy this order.