SATISH KUMAR CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R.C. Tewari, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Mr. Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, learned Counsel for the respondents No. 2 to 4.

(2.) The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order No. 14927 dated 15.11.2018 contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition, whereby the petitioner's contract as Handling and Transport Contractor, PEG Mubarakpur Kala, Ballia and State Warehousing Centre, Chitbaragaon have been cancelled. The petitioner has also challenged the order No. 14926 dated 15.11.2018 contained in Annexure no.2, whereby his ad hoc contract as Handling and Transport Contractor, State Warehousing Centre, Chitbaragaon has been cancelled by the Secretary, U.P. State Warehousing Corporation, New Hyderabad, Lucknow. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 5.12.2018 and the consequential order dated 15.12.2018, whereby registration of the petitioner as Handling and Transport Contractor has been cancelled as well as advertisement/e-tender notice dated 6.1.2019 to the extent it invites tender for appointment of Handling and Transport Contractors with respect to centre PEG Mubarakpur Kala, Ballia.

(3.) At the very outset, learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner did not want to press the relief against the orders dated 15.12.2018 and 5.12.2018 contained in Annexure Nos. 3 and 4, respectively, to the writ petition and he confines his prayer only to quashing the order No. 14927 dated 15.11.2018 and order No. 14926 dated 15.11.2018 contained in Annexure Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, to the writ petition.