Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010248682025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6046/2025 M/S TANOR ENGINEERING - M/S SATISH AGARWAL AND COMPANY (JV) AND ANR A JOINT VENTURE REPRESENTED BY SRI DILING TATAK THE PROPRIETOR OF M/S TANOR ENGINEERING BEING THE LEAD MEMBER AND THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER OF THE AFORESAID JV HAVING ITS OFFICE AT P-SECTOR ITANAGAR P.O. AND P.S. ITANAGAR DISTRICT - PAPUMPARE-791111 ARUNACHAL PRADESH REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR. DILING TATAK i.e. THE PETITIONER NO. 2 2: MR DILING TATAK SON OF SRI TAGOM TATAK RESIDENT OF P-SECTOR ITANAGAR P.O. AND P.S. ITANAGAR DISTRICT- PAPUMPARE-791111 ARUNACHAL PRADESH. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF DEFENCE 101-A SOUTH BLOCK NEW DELHI. 2:THE BORDER ROAD ORGANISATION REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR GENERAL (DG) MINISTRY OF DEFENCE SEEMA SADAK BHAWAN RING ROAD Page No.# 2/3 NARAINA DELHI CANT NEW DELHI-110010. 3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER BRO PROJECT BRAHMANK C/O APO RANEGHAT DISTRICT-EAST SIANG PASIGHAT ARUNACHAL PRADESH PIN - 931722. 4:THE SCREENING COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN VSM ADGBR ADDL. DGBR EAST JALUKBARI GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN-781014. ------------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. K. J. Saikia, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. H. Gupta, CGC BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 08.12.2025 Heard Mr. K. J. Saikia, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and Mr. H. Gupta, the learned CGC appearing on behalf of the Respondents. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioners challenging the decision of the Screening Committee in the Page No.# 3/3 Supplementary Minutes of the Third Meeting of the Screening Committee dated 09.10.2025 thereby declaring the technical bid of the Petitioner No.1 as non-responsive. 3. It is relevant to take note of that during the pendency of the instant writ petition, the Respondent Authorities had taken a decision in the fourth Minutes of the Meeting of the Screening Committee wherein the Petitioner No.1 was evaluated as technically responsive. Further to that, the financial evaluation was carried out wherein the Petitioner No.1 was found to be L12 bidder. The said Minutes of the Fourth Meeting of the Screening Committee as well as the documents enclosed to the said communication are kept on record and marked with the letter “X”. 4. Taking into account the above, nothing further survives in the instant writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed. 5. Interim order passed on 24.10.2025 stands vacated. JUDGE Comparing Assistant