I-NET SECURE LABS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR BIKASH SHAW vs ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ORS — WPA /6237/2026
Case under No Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 25th March 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA0122732026
Next Hearing
16th March 2026
Filing Number
WPA /6193/2026
Filing Date
12-03-2026
Registration No
WPA /6237/2026
Registration Date
12-03-2026
Judge
HON'BLE JUSTICE KRISHNA RAO
Coram
HON'BLE JUSTICE KRISHNA RAO
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )
Sub-Category
Residuary ( 26 )
Judicial Branch
MANDAMUS SECTION
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
I-NET SECURE LABS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR BIKASH SHAW
Respondent(s)
ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ORS
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE KRISHNA RAO
NEW MOTION
SPECIALLY FIXED MATTERS
URGENT MOTION 1
URGENT MOTION 1
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | NEW MOTION | |
| 20-03-2026 | SPECIALLY FIXED MATTERS | |
| 18-03-2026 | URGENT MOTION 1 | |
| 16-03-2026 | URGENT MOTION 1 |
Orders
Summary The High Court at Calcutta dismissed a writ petition challenging a tender for election surveillance systems while finding the evaluation process arbitrary and discriminatory. The court found that the Election Commission's unequal treatment of bidders—accepting Union Territory (Delhi) experience from one bidder while rejecting similar experience (Puducherry/Daman) from the petitioner—violated Article 14 equality principles. However, the court refused to quash work orders already issued, prioritizing the public interest in conducting West Bengal's elections on schedule over the petitioner's private claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The High Court at Calcutta dismissed a writ petition challenging a tender for election surveillance systems while finding the evaluation process arbitrary and discriminatory. The court found that the Election Commission's unequal treatment of bidders—accepting Union Territory (Delhi) experience from one bidder while rejecting similar experience (Puducherry/Daman) from the petitioner—violated Article 14 equality principles. However, the court refused to quash work orders already issued, prioritizing the public interest in conducting West Bengal's elections on schedule over the petitioner's private claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts