IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3709 of 2026 Decided on : 25.03.2026 Vikram Singh ...petitioner Versus State of HP and Others …Respondents. Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Kuthiala, Sr. Advocate, with M/s Abhishek Kaistha, Sana Rana and Tamanna Sharma, Advocates. For the respondent(s) : Mr. Varun Chandel, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 4/State. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral) Notice. Mr. Varun Chandel, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 5 and respondent No.6, respectively. 2. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the notices, Annexures P-13 and P-14, served on 17.03.2026. The challenge is primarily to the defaulter status of respondent No. 6 and also relates to the issue of the last bid of the petitioner made prior to the open 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes -2- auction, as well as the non-award of the liquor vend of Unit No. 4, Kamand Nagwain. 3. Learned Senior Counsel has raised two primary issues. Firstly, that the bidding process had closed and the petitioner was the highest bidder at that stage, and that no further bids could have been permitted beyond the prescribed period. It is submitted that the petitioner had made the last bid of Rs. 5,85,57,517/- and, therefore, had a right in that regard, as reflected from Annexure P-14. Secondly, it is contended that respondent No. 6 is a defaulter and, as per the Excise Policy, a defaulter or its related entities are debarred from participating in the bidding process. Reference has also been made to entities namely Amit Enterprises and Bhavya Enterprises, along with other firms, as per the averments made in Para 13 of the writ petition. 4. Counsel appearing for the respondents/State has produced the bid sheet of respondent No. 6 pertaining to the e- auction conducted for the vend in question to demonstrate that there was a standard increase of Rs. 1,00,000/- in the bid amount and that the bids were placed within the prescribed time. Reliance has also been placed on the letter dated 25th March, 2026, issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Taxes and Excise, stating that respondent No. 6 is not a defaulter. 5. We are of the considered opinion that the matter is required to be examined by the competent authority with regard to -3- these aspects, since the legal notices served have not yet been decided, before the finalization of the bidding process. Therefore, we dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to official respondent No. 2 to consider the legal notices, Annexures P-13 and P-14, and pass a reasoned and speaking order. It shall be open to the petitioner to submit a detailed representation summarizing its grievances and placing on record relevant material, which shall be duly considered by respondent No. 2. Needless to say, respondent No. 6 shall also be afforded an opportunity to rebut the said representation. The entire process shall be completed on or before 30th March, 2026. In view of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of, along with all pending miscellaneous applications, if any. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 25th March, 2026 (Tarun)