Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10216 (GAU)

M/S MEGHALAYA CONSTRUCTION AND SUPPLY COMPANY v. HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LIMITED AND ORS

I.A.(Civil)/963/2025 · 2025-04-01

Lanusungkum Jamir

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010056022025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/963/2025 M/S MEGHALAYA CONSTRUCTION AND SUPPLY COMPANY A PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT PATAN TEHSIL NEEM KA THANA DISTRICT SIKAR RAJASTHAN REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SUNIL DEWAN RESIDENT OF 124 TULSI RAM MARG GURU JAMBESWAR NAGAR VAISHALI NAGAR JAIPUR RAJASTHAN 302021 VERSUS HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LIMITED AND ORS REP BY THE HEAD (CPG) HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 3RD FLOOR NBCC SQUARE PLOT NO III F S ACTION AREA III NBEW TOWN RAJARHAT PO AKANDAKESHARI KOLKATA 700135 2:THE HEAD CPG HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LIMITED 3RD FLOOR NBCC SQUARE PLOT NO III F 2 ACTION AREA III NEW TOWN RAJARHAT PO AKANDAKESHARI KOLKATA 3:UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVTR OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOUSING AND URBAN AFFAIRS 4:THE ZONAL HEAD NE HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LIMITED H O TRIDIB KUMAR BORKAKOTY 1ST FLLOR AEC ROAD JALUKBARI 5:M/S SATYAM CONTRACTORS PVT LTD. 4TH FLOOR ANIL PLAZA KAMRUP M ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. R HUSSAIN Page No.# 2/2 Advocate for : MR. S S ROY appearing for HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LIMITED AND ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR ORDER Date : 02.04.2025 Heard Mr. R. Hussain, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. S. S. Roy, learned CGC for the respondent No.3. By this application, the applicant who is the writ petitioner in WP(C)/1545/2025 is praying for impleadment of M/s Satyam Contractors Pvt. Ltd. 4th Floor, Anil Plaza, G. S. Road, Guwahati-781006, Kamrup (M), Assam as party respondent No.5 in the said writ petition, on the ground that the proposed respondent No.5 has been declared as the sole successful tenderer and therefore the respondent No.5 is a necessary party in the writ petition. This Court has also perused the cause shown in the present application and is satisfied. Accordingly, the prayer for impleadment is allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant