1 2025:CGHC:47373-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4595 of 2025 M/s Ghanshyam Laundry Through Its Proprietor Shri Ghanshyam Choudhary, Aged About 45 Years, S/o Shri Ganpat Ram Aged About 64 Years R/o H. No. 504, Dhobipara, Raja Talab, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. Union of India Through The Secretary, Ministry of Health And Family Welfare, New Delhi. 2. The Director A.I.I.M.S.- Raipur, Tatibandh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. The Deputy Director (Administration) A.I.I.M.S.- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4. The Stores Officer (Central) Office of the Stores, Department of Central Procurement, A.I.I.M.S.- Raipur, Tatibandh, Raipur (C.G.) ...Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Sudhanshu Upadhyay, Advocate. For Respondent/UOI : Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan, Central Government Counsel. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.09.16 18:06:06 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 16.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. Sudhanshu Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan, learned Central Government counsel, appearing for the Union of India. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “(i) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present writ petition & call for the entire record pertaining to the present case. (ii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction to the respondents more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent – AIIMS, Raipur in rejecting the technical bid of petitioner vide the impugned email communication/intimation dated 04.08.2025 in respect of the Tender bearing No. GEM/2025/B/6192169 as absolutely illegal, arbitrary, capricious, contrary to law as well as settled legal position and also against the 3 general principles of contract and consequently, quash the same. (iii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction to the respondents more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents more particularly of respondent – AIIMS, Raipur to issue the work order in favour of petitioner in relation to the Tender bearing No. GEM/2025/B/6192169. (iv) That, any other order/relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, proper and just in the facts and circumstances of the present case may also kindly be awarded to the petitioner in the ends of justice & equity. (v) That the cost of the petition may kindly also be awarded to the petitioner.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present petition. It is submitted that against the rejection of his technical bid, the petitioner had preferred a representation before the competent authority, which too has been rejected. Accordingly, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the present petition may kindly be dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to challenge both the rejection of his technical bid as well as the rejection of the aforesaid representation. 4 4. Learned State counsel has no objection. 5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty, as prayed for. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan