SANTOSH PURUSHOTTAM PUROHIT Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA; COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SUPPLY AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS; DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF FOOD CIVIL SUPPLY & CONSUMER AFFAIRS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. P.Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Mr. H.S.Thangkhiew, learned Sr. counsel, assisted by Mr. P.N.Nongbri, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner's case in a nutshell is that:

(3.) Ms. P.Bhattacharjee, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is one of the bidder in response to NIT dated 26th March, 2016 for supply of PDS Sugar in the State of Meghalaya but he has simply been disqualified on technical grounds. Hence, he approached the Court by way of this writ petition. She also made it clear that the petitioner, Shri. Santosh Purushottam Purohit is a representative of the company called M/s Garden Court Distilleries Private Ltd, Mumbai, Maharashtra State, India. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the NIT in question maybe recalled with changes in clause 11. She vehemently and forcefully argued to establish her case.