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

CASE DISPOSED

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

NO ACT Section NA

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

16-03-2026

NEW MOTION

20-03-2026

SPECIALLY FIXED MATTERS

18-03-2026

URGENT MOTION 1

16-03-2026

URGENT MOTION 1

Orders

25-03-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE KRISHNA RAO

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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

Search Another Case