Orissa High Court
Forum Projects Pvt. Ltd vs State Of Orissa And Another ..... ... on 17 July, 2023
Bench: B.R. Sarangi, Murahari Sri Raman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P (C) No. 8653 of 2015
Forum Projects Pvt. Ltd. ..... Petitioner
Mr. Biswajit Das, Adv.
Vs.
State of Orissa and another ..... Opposite Parties
Mr. P.P. Mohanty, AGA
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI
MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
ORDER
17.07.2023 Order No. This matter is taken up by hybrid mode.
05.
2. Heard Mr. Biswajit Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.P. Mohanty, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the State-opposite parties.
3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 03.03.2015 passed by opposite party no.2 vide Annexure-14, whereby the authority cancelled the Letter of Intent dated 16.08.2008 and also forfeited the deposited bid money amounting to Rs.2.35 crores, and to issue direction to the opposite party no.2 to execute the required agreement with the petitioner so as to proceed with the Integrated Commercial-Cum-Residential Project at Corporation Road, Berhampur. The petitioner also seeks direction to the authority to not only treat the bid money deposit made by the petitioner as part compliance prior to execution of the agreement, but also to extend necessary administrative support subsequent to execution of the Lease-cum-Development Agreement and hading over of encroachment free site to the petitioner.
4. Mr. Biswajit Das, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that even though the Letter of Intent was Page 1 of 3 awarded on 16.06.2008 and the petitioner deposited Rs.2.35 crores, but the same was cancelled vide order dated 03.03.2015 under Annexure-14. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. It is contended that forfeiture of the amount should be set aside by invoking extra- ordinary jurisdiction of this Court.
5. Mr. P.P. Mohanty, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the State-opposite parties contended that so far as forfeiture of the bid money is concerned, the same forms part of the condition of the bid document. Therefore, since the petitioner could not come out successful, as per the procedure envisaged in the bid document, the bid amount deposited by the petitioner was forfeited. It is contended that forfeiture of the amount was done in the year 2015 and though the writ petition was filed in the year 2015, but due to non-appearance of the petitioner, it was dismissed on 25.01.2023 for non-prosecution. Thereafter, the writ petition was restored vide order dated 30.06.2023 by recalling of the order dated 25.01.2023. Therefore, if at all the petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the authority; it is open to the petitioner to pursue its remedy before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court finds that forfeiture of the bid amount has been done in terms of the bid documents. As such, the petitioner has also admitted that it has not complied with the order dated 11.05.2015 passed by this Court in Misc. Case No. 8399 of 2015. Therefore, if at all the petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the authority; it is open to the petitioner to pursue its remedy before the appropriate forum in terms of the tender documents Page 2 of 3 instead of approaching this Court by filing the present writ petition.
7. In the above view of the matter, this Court disposes of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law.
Ashok (DR. B.R. SARANGI)
JUDGE
(M.S. RAMAN)
JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Date: 18-Jul-2023 14:50:06
Page 3 of 3