M/s Tayo Enterprises v. The State of AP and 6 Others
WP(C)/618/2024 · 2025-02-20
Arun Dev Choudhury
Writ Petition (Civil)body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5125 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5125 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC040018442024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/618/2024 M/s Tayo Enterprises represented by its Proprietor Shri Tayo Tallom Rending, Rending Complex, Barapani, Naharlagun, PO/PS Naharlagun, District Papum Pare, Arunachal Pradesh.
VERSUS The State of AP and 6 Others represented by the Secretary, RWD cum Chief Executive Officer, ARRDA, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh. 2:The Chief Engineer Age: 0 Occupation : PMGSY Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh. 3:The Superintendent Engineer Age: 0 Occupation : Rural Work Circle (RWC) Rupa West Kameng District Arunachal Pradesh. 4:The Chairman Age: 0 Occupation : Tender Evaluation Committee (RWC) Rupa West Kameng District Arunachal Pradesh. 5:The Executive Engineer/PIU Age: 0 Occupation : Rural Works Department
Page No.# 2/3 Bameng Division East Kameng Arunachal Pradesh. 6:M/s GYT Trading Centre Age: 0 Occupation : represented by its proprietor Mrs. Tar Munni Ganga Market Itanagar PO/PS Itanagar District Papum Pare Arunachal Pradesh 7:M/s Capital Enterprises Age: 0 Occupation : represented by its proprietor Miss Senbom Taipodia C-Sector Naharlagun PO/PS Naharlagun District Papum Pare Advocate for the Petitioner : Pritam Taffo, Eho Menjo,Minter Karbak Advocate for the Respondent : Gimi Tarak, SC(RWD),Tana Rini
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER 21.02.2025 Heard Mr. E. Manjo, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. G. Tarak, learned counsel for the respondents. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of issuance of fresh tender and completion of evaluation of technical bid pursuant to such fresh tender, nothing survives to be adjudicated in the present writ petition. Accordingly, it has become infructuous. In view of the aforesaid submission, this writ petition stands closed being
Page No.# 3/3 infructuous. Interim order if any stands vacated. JUDGE Comparing Assistant