CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

M/s. Maa Belei Women Self Help Group, Soro vs State Of Odisha And Others

Orissa High Court · Decided on 14 March 2023 · Citation: (2023) 03 OHC CK 0094

HON’BLE JUDGES
Arindam Sinha, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No.24278 Of 2022
Download PDFAsk AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 364 words

Arindam Sinha, J

1.

Mr. S. K. Das, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner, who is a Self Help Group (SHG). He submits, by impugned communication dated 1st June, 2022 there was information that, inter alia, opposite party no.5 had been selected. This could not have been done because for purpose of selection his client had secured 80 marks. His client duly obtained information that said opposite party got 61 marks. Moreover, said opposite party does not exist at the address as the purported lease agreement does not carry signature of the SHG.

2.

Mr. Sharma, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State and submits, the procurement period is due to expire on 31st March, 2023. In the circumstances, this writ petition be disposed of as was WP(C) no.36226 of 2022 (Krupajala Self Help Group, Balssore vs. State of Odisha and others) on order dated 9th March, 2023.

3.

Mr. B. P. Das, learned advocate appears on behalf of opposite party no.5.

4.

On query from Court Mr. S. K. Das submits, that opposite party no.5 got 61 marks was stated in paragraph 8 of the petition. Mr. Sharma submits, said paragraph was dealt with in paragraph 15 of the counter and score-sheets, stamped by the District Welfare Officer on 19th April, 2022, stand disclosed in support, to show petitioner got 74 marks and opposite party no.5, 89 marks.

5.

Court is not inclined to further probe for adjudication on a dispute regarding number of marks obtained, respectively by petitioner and opposite party no.5 for purpose of selection to supply the Take Home Ration (TRH). It is undisputed that the period of supply is due expire on 31st March, 2022. It is sufficient to say that petitioner’s contentions have been recorded earlier and in this order. In event petitioner wants to pursue further for remedy, it may do so.

6.

So far as, challenge in the writ petition is concerned, there will be direction that for the ensuing period, all contenders for being selected as suppliers must be dealt with in the manner transparent and fair, to their notice.

7.

With above direction the writ petition is disposed of.

…………………………..