YASHWANT SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

Yashwant Singh v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 18020 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 7168 (18 April 2007)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

COURT NO.29.

CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO.18020 of 2007.

Yashwant Singh   Petitioner.

Versus

State of U.P. and others. Respondents.

Hon'ble Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.

Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos 1 and 5,  Sri A.B. Singh for respondent nos. 2 and 3 and Sri Sanjai Srivastava for respondent no.4.

This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 28th March, 2007 by which the Nagar Panchayat, Chandauli, District Chandauli has settled the contract of collecting the parking fee in favour of respondent no.4 Sri Haridwar Singh,

The grievance of the petitioner is that no wide publicity  has ever been made before settling the contract in favour of respondent No.4.

It is evident from the document annexed with the counter affidavit that the publicity was given in the local newspaper "Dainik Sanjai Veena" published from Varanasi. However, it is not clear as what is the circulation of the said newspaper and whether it needs requirement for proper advertisement of settling the contract of public institution. Learned counsel for the parties had agreed that direction be issued to the Nagar Panchayat to hold a fresh auction after giving due publicity in the newspaper having wide circulation and it may be given at-least in two newspapers. They have suggested that it should be published in "Aaj" and " Times of India" (Varanasi edition) at the earliest.

In view of the suggestion made by the learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of the writ petition in view of their consent that the contract in favour of respondent no.4 is set aside and fresh advertisement be issued in two local newspaper as explained above  and the contract may be settled at the earliest. It will be open for the respondent no.4 either to withdraw the amount deposited by him or to get it pending with the Nagar Panchayat, in case, he wants to participate in the auction and in case he succeeds in the contract the said amount may be adjusted in accordance to law. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that at the time of renewal of his contract, which has subsequently been cancelled by the order of the District Collector certain amounts remained outstanding with Nagar Panchayat, the petitioner is entitled for refund.   In case he moves such application before Nagar Panchayat, his application for refund may be considered in accordance to law and the amount may be refunded to him.

With these observations, the writ petition stand disposed of.

Dated.18.04.2007.

VS.

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.