Hazrat Belal vs The State of Bihar & Ors

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.

The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs: "(i) To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing letter dated 13.06.2016 (Annexure-7) issued under the signature of respondent Head respondent Deputy Head, Transportation, Headquarters, upon the orders of the Respondent Managing Director, whereby and whereunder Shri Kumar Abhishek was also appointed as Transporting, Handling cum Delivery Agent in the District of Bhojpur, on the grounds that the same is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice and also against the own guidelines of the Respondent S.F.C. as contained in Annexure-2.

(ii) To issue further appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing tender notice published on 20.07.2016 (Annexure-10), on the grounds that the same also is not only against the guidelines of the Respondents but also violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

(iii) To issue further appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the Respondents to allow the petitioner to work as Transporting, Handling cum Delivery Agent for the whole of Bhojpur District as per the terms of Agreement dated 27.05.2016.

(iv) This Hon''ble court may adjudicate and hold that the action of the Respondents in appointing Shri Kumar Abhishek as Transporting, Handling cum Delivery Agent in the District of Bhojpur, is an act of mala fides and complete arbitrary exercise of power/authority vested with them.

(v) This Hon''ble Court may further adjudicate and hold that the action of Respondent Authorities in appointing Shri Kumar Abhishek as Transporting, Handling cum Delivery Agent in the District of Bhojpur, is violative of principles of natural justice and guidelines contained in Annexure-2, as neither there is a refusal by the petitioner to provide service in a selected region nor has he given his express consent for the same.

(vi) This Hon''ble Court may further adjudicate and hold that the action of Respondent Authorities in floating second tender is not only against the guidelines of the Respondents but also violativeof the fundamental rights guaranteed to petitioner under of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

(vii) This Hon''ble Court may further adjudicate and hold that Respondent Authorities should not have floated a second tender for the same Districts during the term of the prevailing contracts/agreement.

(viii) This Hon''ble Court may award the cost of litigation and suitable compensation to the petitioner for the loss and damages caused on account of the illegal and arbitrary actions of the Respondents Authorities.

(ix) To grant any other relief or reliefs which the petitioner may be found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case."

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the present writ petitions need not be pressed in view of the pending representation before the Deputy Head, Transportation, Headquarters, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited (respondent no. 5) which would be pursued by the petitioners.

In the above view of the matter, the writ petitions stand dismissed.