Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 1190 (MP)

Nirmal Gupta v. State of M. P.

2013-10-01

R.S.JHA

body2013
JUDGMENT R.S. Jha, J. 1. Further heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had obtained a contract of construction of a warehouse godown. However, subsequently, it came to the notice of the petitioner that the land on which the proposed construction of the godown was to be made, was duly notified as forest land and in such circumstances, the petitioner applied for change of place in accordance with the circular of the M.P. Warehousing and Logistics Corporation dated 22.05.2013 but the respondents/authorities have not considered and rejected the petitioner's representation in view of the clause 12 of the Tender conditions without taking note of the aforesaid circular which permits change of place. 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is observed that whether or not to permit the petitioner to change the place for construction of the go-down, is the prerogative of the M.P. Warehousing and Logistics Corporation and decision in that regard has to be taken by it in accordance with law. It is also observed that the dispute between the parties is purely contractual. 3. In the circumstances, without entering into the merits of the case, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to again approach the respondents by bringing to their notice the circular dated 22.05.2013. 4. It goes without saying that in case the petitioner does so along with a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition within 15 days before the authority concerned, he shall consider and decide the same taking into consideration the tender conditions and the impact, if any of the circular dated 22.05.2013 expeditiously, in accordance with law. 5. However, it is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and therefore the authority would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the representation by passing a reasoned order. 6. With the aforesaid liberty/observations, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.