M/S MA LAXMI CONSTRUCTION, A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR LAXMI KANT DUBEY v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF JHARKHAND
WPC/3756/2025 · 2025-11-14
Rajesh Shankar
Writ Petition (Civil)body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 38280 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 38280 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:JHHC:34090-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.3756 of 2025 ----- M/s. Ma Laxmi Construction, a partnership firm, through its proprietor Laxmi Kant Dubey, son of Rajendra Dubey, Resident of at Dubey Tahle, P.O. & P.S. Majhiaon, District-Garhwa, Jharkhand.
.......... Petitioner. -Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi.
2. Secretary, Rural Development Department (Rural Work Affairs), Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi.
3. Chief Engineer, Rural Development Department (Rural Work Affairs), Government of Jharkhand, Engineering Bhawan, Kutchery Road, Ranchi.
4. Executive Engineer, Work Division, Garhwa, Rural Development Department (Rural Work Affairs), Gahrwa, Jharkhand.
5. M/s Nitin Raj, a proprietor concern through its proprietor, namely, Nitin Raj, son of Onkar Nath Shukla, resident of at Jailhata, Katchary Road, Daltonganj, Palamau, Jharkhand.
.......... Respondents. -----
CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Amritansh Vats, Advocate For the State : Mr. Piyush Chitresh, AC to AG For the Res. No.5 : Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate -----
Order No.05
Date: 14.11.2025
1. Since the tender already stands allotted on 26th June, 2025 i.e., prior to filing of the writ petition on 3rd July, 2025, obviously this writ petition, assailing the tender process more particularly disqualification of the petitioner herein, is clearly misconceived and has otherwise being rendered infructuous.
2. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
3. However, it is made clear that in case, the petitioner has any other or further grievance, it is at liberty to avail of such remedy as available under the law.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J.)
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
14th November, 2025 Sanjay/Rohit