WRIT PETITION (C) No. 2123 of20U7 ";'''( T ) ?.'-« ' PETITIONER M/s. TechnouriUers, 38. VaUabh Nagar, Pachpcdi Naka, Raipur, C.G. Tbrougli Its Managine Partner Mool Chand Jain, Aged about 58 years, R'o C-135, Sectof V, Tagore Nagar, RaiDur District Raiour (C.G.) 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Seeretary, Public Kealth Engmeering Department, MaiitraSaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Eagineers m Cliief Public IIeaMi Engineerini Department, Raipur, C.G. 3. C3iief Engmeer, Public Health Engineeriiig Departnient, Raipur Circie. Raipur C.G. 4. Project Eugineer, Public IIealth Engiaeerui^ Department. Raipur Circle, Raipur, C.G. 5. M's. Maiiisfa Pipes Pvt. Ltd. tlirough its Director Shri Jagdish Prasad Jhanwar S/o. Shri Deepehasid Jl'iauwar, aged about 50 years, R/o B-13 Rawanbhata, Industrial Area, Raipur, (Chliattisgarh) WRFT pErrnoN UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE coNSTrrm'iON OF INDIA Hon'ble SlmJasdish BhaBa. Actmg CMef'Justice & Hon'fele Shri Satish K. AgniliotriJ. Present: Sliri N.K.Vvas, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Prashaiit Mislira, Additional Advocate General fortlie State. Stiri Saniav K. Aerawal. Advocate for the intervenor. ('Pit.carj r>., Qttl ,1g,, nF A,,CT,"C+ ^i a.&oii.'U yii 7 u<3.3- Vl ;-iU^i*&t, AiiJfv / ^ The initial challenee ofthe petitioner, with respect to erant oftender- form has ah-eady become inlhictuous because fhe tender has akeady been accepted, but the work could not start as the interim order dated 16.7.2007 has been passed by this Court. The second prayer witli regard to competency to impose restrictiou'condition No. 1, it has been submitted on behalfofthe petitioner that it could onlv be done with the permission of the State Goverament. Whereas, accordine to the leamed Additional Advocate General, this condition can be \' 32 imposed bv Eneineer-in-Chief. The same has been done with the approval of the Engineer-in-Chiefand later on, approval was accorded by the State Govemment. On the other hand, for Group B matter, approval ofthe State Govenmient is required. Since the condition of the Group A, which was challeneed by the petitioner, can be imposed by the Engmeer-in-Chiet. no interference is warranted. Tfaus, the petition is dismissed accordingly. The interim order aranted on 16.7.2007 is discharged. However, it could be open to the petitioner to seek redressal befbre proper fomm, if he so desires. No lurther order is reauired. Sd/- Ag.ChiefJustice Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge AmifcBablu -l-