Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sphatika Facility Service India Private Limited vs Deputy Commissioner And President Outsourcing Selection Committee And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|15 July, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.44202/2018 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN:
SPHATIKA FACILITY SERVICE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, NO.3541, 20TH "A" MAIN ROAD, NEW HOYSALA CIRCLE, VIJAYANAGARA 2ND STAGE, MYSORE-570 017.
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI.RAGHAVENDRA.N, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND PRESIDENT OUTSOURCING SELECTION COMMITTEE, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLEX, DAVANAGERE-577 006.
2. DISTRICT HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE OFFICER SOG COLONY, DAVANAGERE INDUSTRIAL AREA, DAVANAGERE-577 003.
3. BKR SWAMY SECURITY AGENCIES, OFFICE AT NO.310, PAVILION ROAD, P.J. EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE-577 002, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR BKR SWAMY. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VIJAYA KUMAR.A.PATIL, AGA FOR RESPONDENTS 1 & 2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM DTD 31.08.2018 PASSED BY THE R-2, CIDE ANNX-A SINCE THE SAID OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM IS UNJUST AND ILLEGAL.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri Raghavendra N., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri Vijaya Kumar A.Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents 1 & 2.
2. Petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the parties, same is heard finally.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that by Official Memorandum dated 31.08.2018, work order issued in favour of successful bidder has been cancelled. Petitioner, prima facie, has no locus to challenge the same. Petitioner has sought a writ of mandamus directing respondents to permit the petitioner to complete the work awarded to it. The said relief also cannot be granted at the instance of the petitioner.
4. In view of the aforesaid submission and taking into account the nature of the relief as prayed for by the petitioner, I do not find any ground to entertain the petition. The same fails and is hereby dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE PKS
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sphatika Facility Service India Private Limited vs Deputy Commissioner And President Outsourcing Selection Committee And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
15 July, 2019
Judges
  • Alok Aradhe