M/S PARKASH CHAND GOYAL v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
CWP/18283/2025 · 2025-07-14
Jagmohan Bansal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 67969 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 67969 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
130 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
****
CWP-18283-2025 Date of Decision: 14.07.2025
M/S Parkash Chand Goyal
...Petitioner Vs. Union of India and Others
...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present:- None for the petitioner.
Mr. Vinay Kumar, Advocate
For Mr. Sunish Bindlesh, Standing Counsel
For respondent-FCI.
****
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)
1.
On 07.07.2025, this Court passed the following order:-
“Through the instant writ petition, as cast under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, a prayer is made to issue a Mandamus upon respondent No.4, to refund the Earnest Money Deposit, as deposited by the petitioner. In nutshell, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, which is a partnership firm, had participated in the tender floated by respondent No.4, however, it remained unsuccessful. Therefore, the limited grievance, that propelled the petitioner to file the instant petition is that despite several requests, its EMD has still not been refunded by respondent No.4. In this regard, a legal notice dated 14.04.2025 (Annexure P-6), was also sent through e-mail, but the same too has failed to evoke any response. Without issuing a formal notice, at this stage, the learned counsel for the respondent-FCI is directed to have apt MOHIT KUMAR 2025.07.14 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this
order/judgment.
CWP-18283-2025
-2-
instructions from the quarter concerned, and inform this Court, as to how much time is required by the authorities concerned, to decide the legal notice (supra). Adjourned to 14.07.2025.”
2.
Mr. Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent-FCI submits that the earnest money deposited stands released, thus, the instant petition has rendered infructuous.
3.
Disposed of as infructuous.
4.
Since there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, it is at liberty to move an appropriate application within three months from today, if cause survives.
(JAGMOHAN BANSAL)
JUDGE 14.07.2025 Deepak Bissyan/Mohit Kumar
Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable
Yes/No
MOHIT KUMAR 2025.07.14 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this
order/judgment.