Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24540 of 2018 Petitioner :- M/S Irfan Fruit And Vegetable Company Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Sinha,Mahesh Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Archit Mandhyan
Hon'ble Govind Mathur,J. Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.
This petition for writ is before us with the prayers as follows:-
"I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.3 to make byelaws as provided under Section 39 of the U.P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964.
II) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.3 and 4 not to grant fresh license to any person and not to make any allotment of shops and space in the newly constructed market yard till the byelaws are made in accordance with the Section 39 of U.P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964 and rules framed therein.
III) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.3 to decide the representation dated 1.5.2018 filed by petitioner (Annexure No.12 to the writ petition)."
So far as prayer no.1 is concerned, it is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents no.2, 3 and 4 that the Mandi has adopted the bye-laws framed by Mandi Parishad- respondent no.2 and those are applicable on respondent no.3.
It is further stated that the petitioner in garb of seeking a direction to have bye-laws for the respondent no.3 wants to question the process of auction that has already been completed and wherein the petitioner too participated. On being failed to have contract, he has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by filing the instant petition for writ.
Learned counsel has shown us auction summary as downloaded from the e-auction system i.e. https://eauction.gov.in/eAuction/app?component.
From perusal of the account summary, it reveals that the petitioner submitted his bid on 6th July, 2018 on-line at 12:59:35 pm. The bid was subsequently opened in favour of M/s Sudesh Traders. The facts stated above have not been disclosed in this petition for writ. We are of the opinion that non-disclosure of the fact about participation of the petitioner in tender process is concealment of a material fact and that disentitles him to have any relief in writ jurisdiction. It is also pertinent that the successful bidder M/s Sudesh Traders too has not been impleaded as a party respondent.
In view of whatever stated above, the writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.7.2018 Bhaskar (Chandra Dhari Singh, J.) (Govind Mathur, J.)