Full Judgment Text
$~20 & 21
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 13.02.2017
+ W.P.(C) 6658/2016 & CM No. 27220/2016
PARAM HANS IMPEX PVT. LTD. & ANR ..... Petitioners
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents
+ W.P.(C) 6660/2016 & CM No. 27223/2016
AGGARWAL WEIGH BRIDGE PVT. LTD. ORS ..... Petitioners
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr. Arvind Kr. Gupta, Mr. Rachit Gupta and Ms. A. Malik,
Advs.
For the Respondents : Mr. Santosh Kr. Tripathi, ASC with Mr. Rizwan, Adv. for R-
1
Ms. Renuka Arora, Mr.Kunal Kohli and Mr. Abhishek Pundir,
Advs. for DSIIDC
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioner, by the present petition, had sought quashing of
Notice Inviting Tender bearing No. NIT/01/2016-17 issued by the
W.P.(C) No.6658/2016 & 6660/2016 Page 1 of 2
respondent no. 2 whereby the respondent no. 2 was proposing to set up
weigh bridges on its own. The petitioner had contended that since
designated sites were available for setting up weigh bridges, the respondent
should have invited tenders from third parties to set up weigh bridges.
2. Learned counsel for the Respondent no. 2 submits that the said
Respondent has filed affidavit dated 01.12.2016 and an additional affidavit
dated 08.02.2017. Both the affidavits stated have been filed are not on
record. In case the same have not been placed on record and returned under
objection on the ground that the same were filed late, the delay in filing the
affidavits is condoned. Counsel is directed to have the same placed on
record. Copies of the affidavits have been produced in court and are taken
on record.
3. Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 submits that respondents have,
at the present, dropped the proposal of setting up weigh bridges on its own
and has decided to auction the vacant plots for setting up of weigh bridges.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the stand
of the respondent no. 2, the petitioner does not press the present petition
any further.
5. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
FEBRUARY 13, 2017
‘ rs’
W.P.(C) No.6658/2016 & 6660/2016 Page 2 of 2