Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 231 (JK)

WASEEM NAIK v. UT OF J AND K TH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PWD (R AND B) DEPARTMENT, JAMMU AND ANOTHER

WP(C)/3585/2025 · 2026-02-17

Ma Chowdhary

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No. 3585/2025 Waseem Naik …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Gaurav Sadotra, Advocate vs UT of J&K & Anr. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M A CHOWDHARY, JUDGE ORDER (17.02.2026) 1. The petitioner who is a registered Contractor came to respond to e-NIT No. 06 of 2025-26 dated 17.10.2025 for the work of “Balance work of construction of road from Bharshalla to Bhalwana via Sasool under CRIF”, and disqualified in the technical bid, challenged the same before this Court in the afore titled writ petition. 2. Notice was issued to the respondents by this Court vide order dated 17.12.2025 and a direction was passed to the respondents to evaluate the Financial Bid of the petitioner, along with two other qualified bidders with the rider that in case the petitioner’s financial bid loses out in competition to the qualifying bidder, then the completion of the tendering process be taken to its logical end without reference to the Court and in case the petitioner’s financial bid comes out to be L-1, then further course of action to be taken upon an express order from this Court. 3. Learned Additional Advocate General has produced a copy of the affidavit filed by the petitioner-Waseem Naik and attested by Executive Engineer, PWD (R&B) Division Thathri, deposing therein that the shortcomings in Serial No. 88 2 WP(C) No. 3585/2025 his bid documents has been clarified and that, now he is satisfied with his declaration as “non-responsive” and that he undertakes to withdraw his writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has also been instructed by the petitioner to seek withdrawal of this petition as his grievance has been redressed and he is no longer interested to pursue this petition. His statement is taken on record. 5. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn along with connected application(s). Interim direction is, thus, vacated. (M A CHOWDHARY) JUDGE Jammu 17.02.2026 Tarun/PS Tarun Kumar Gupta 2026.02.17 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document