@ HIGH COURT OF CHHA'l"1"iSGARi—i AT BILASPUR PETITIONER Ramdeen Tondon S/o Shri Hm Ram Tomion, aged-about 4O years, Occupation- Agriculturist: (Cultivator), Rm Ward no. L Sakti. District- Janjgir-Champa [06.) VERSUS .State of Chhattisgarh Through-Secretary Agriculmre Depanment, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur {QGJ . Chhattisgarh State Agricultural Marketing Board Through — Its Manag’ng Director, OElce at - Beej Bhawan (ground floor) Inii‘ont of Chhattisgarh Hotel, G.E. RoatL Ravigram, Telibandha. Raipur {CGJ .Executive Engineer, Chhattisgarh State Agicultural Marketing Board: Beej Bhawan (ground floor) Infront of Chhattisgarh Hotel, G.E. Road: Ravigam, Telibandha, Raipur [C.G.1 . Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Amandulla. Through . Secretary Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Amandulla, District — Janjgir—Chamya [C.G.] . Shri Judawan Gabe] (Thekedar) R/o Bundeli, Tahsil — Malkharouda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa [c.GJ . Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Malkharouda, District — Janjgir-Cha'mpa [CG] — Its Presideht District ~— Janjgir-Champa [C.G.] WRIT PE'I‘ITION UNDER AR'HCLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Comm : Hon’ble Shri Jagdish Bhalla, Acting ChiefJustice & Hon’tiie 8m Satish K. Agnihotri J. Present: Stan Rajeev Shn'vastava: Advocate for the petitioner. Shri U.N.S.Deo, Government Advocate for the State/respondent No.1 Shri V.R.Tiwari, Advocate for respondent No. 4 and 6. WRIT PETITION (PIL) N0. 4i)53 of2IHY7 @ k7 ORAL ORDER (E’assed am 25m day cf July, 2007) The following oral order ofthe Court was passed by Hon’ble Jagdish Bhalla, Acting (3.1.: This public interest litigation has been filed on behalf ofthe petitioner, who is an active political worker. on the gound that the certificate on the basis of which the tender has been accepted, was wrongly issued. However, we have been informed that bV now the work is almost complete. We find that the authority concerned has accepted the tender with all bonatide intention and admittedly, at the time the tender was accepted it was in accordance with law. The authority concemed who has accepted the tender was not at ail at fault. Ifthere was somebody at fault, it was the authority who issued the certificate of experience, according to the petitioner the said certificate was found to be incorrect at the later stage. In such circumstances. no interference is warranted under Article 226 ofthe Constitution, so far as the subject matter in question is concerned. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/— Acting Chief Justice AmitlBablu