The scope 39 and 35 contract withdrawal scope was implemented between the appellant and the medical superintendent of the public hospital, which allowed the appellant to construct a medical store in a hospital premises, building a medical store after the contract. Built and the cover was being used for the respondents of the appellant's medical store, who was also eligible and intended to obtain the contract (medical store), could not be found as if it did not apply to the applicant without a tender. And the applicant's students were called from the respondent filed a writ petition haiku The writ alleges that the hospital's medical superintendent's action was illegal and violated the basic rights guaranteed by the constitution. The High Court accepted the request and the agreement reached between the Appellant and the Medical Superintendent was canceled. The appellant and the medical superintendent, formerly without property bid by the parties, could not be handed over to any private person, without obtaining the government's approval through a government notification, in the present case, the government No Approval was obtained Before the Medical Superintendent contracted with the Appellant, the Medical Superintendent had made a contract with the Appellant on the basis of his liking and dislike which there was no law on which any department Authority to enter into or contract with private parties Have the ability to pan. The appellant's counsel for the negotiation claims that the defendant (writ petition before the High Court)
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2011
