Delhi High Court - Orders
M S Vijay Infra Projects Pvt Ltd vs Union Of India And Ors on 24 December, 2024
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~36
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 18025/2024
M S VIJAY INFRA PROJECTS PVT LTD .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, Senior
Advocate with Ms. Kanika Singh, Mr.
Shubham Jaiswal, Mr. Nikhil Saini
and Mr. Amir Vaid, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 24.12.2024 CM APPL. 76651/2024 (seeking exemption from filing certified copies/ originals of documents and from filing fair/ typed copies of dim documents)
1. Exemption is granted, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The Applicant shall file legible and clearer copies of exempted documents, compliant with practice rules, before the next date of hearing.
3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
CM APPL. 76652/2024 (seeking stay) & W.P.(C) 18025/2024
4. The Petitioner, M/s Vijay Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., a contractor of Military Engineer Services,1 has successfully executed 57 projects for the Respondents and currently has several contracts in progress. They have filed 1 "MES"
W.P.(C) 18025/2024 Page 1 of 4This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/12/2024 at 22:35:18 the instant writ petition, assailing the order dated 16th December, 20242 passed by Respondent No. 1, whereby the Petitioner has been listed in "Work Load Return of 'SS Class' Contractors and Unenlisted Contractors having Work Load more than 15 Crores for the Quarter Ending September 2024" at S. No. 13. The Petitioner is aggrieved by the adverse remark in the column "whether considered for handling more work" recorded as "No, Slow Progress".
5. Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, Senior Counsel for Petitioner, asserts that the impugned listing has the effect of blacklisting/ debarment of the Petitioner from participating in any future contracts of the Respondents. To substantiate the same, he points out to communication dated 19th December, 2024 issued by the Respondent's online portal, which notes that the Petitioner's bid for another contract with the MES has been rejected at the stage of technical evaluation, on account of adverse remark in the WLR.
6. Mr. Wadhwa submits that although the Respondents had issued a show cause notice dated 20th June, 20243 prior to the issuance of the impugned order, the same was responded to by the Petitioner, providing complete details of the reasons for the delay. He submits that the Respondents did not issue any communications to the Petitioner with respect to their response to the impugned SCN, but instead proceeded to list them in the WLR for September, 2024. Further, Mr. Wadhwa emphasises that the delay in the execution of the contract is not attributable to the Petitioner but rather to the Respondents.
7. Additionally, Mr. Wadhwa submits that in respect of the contract 2 "impugned order/ WLR"
3"impugned SCN"W.P.(C) 18025/2024 Page 2 of 4
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/12/2024 at 22:35:18 mentioned in the impugned SCN, the Petitioner has been granted Extension of Time4, without the imposition of any liquidated damages. In fact, Mr. Wadhwa submits that the contract work in question has already been completed and the site was handed over to the Respondent on 25th November, 2024. Furthermore, subsequent to the completion of the project work as well as the issuance of the impugned SCN, the Petitioner's request for EOT till 25th November, 2024 was post facto accepted by the Respondent vide communication dated 30th November, 2024. In light of the foregoing, Mr. Wadhwa argues that since the project work has been completed and since the Respondents themselves agreed to grant extensions of time to the Petitioner, the adverse remark regarding "slow work progress"
in the WLR is unjustified.
8. The Court has considered the submissions of the Petitioner, and is of the opinion that the Petitioner has made a prima facie case. Accordingly, the following directions are issued:
(i) Till the next date of hearing, the impugned communication dated 16th December, 2024, shall be kept in abeyance.
(ii) The Respondents are directed to remove the adverse remark recorded against the Petitioner from the WLR.
9. It is clarified that the Petitioner's participation in subsequent tenders will not be rejected on grounds of the remarks recorded in the impugned order dated 16th December, 2024.
10. Issue notice to Respondents, by all permissible modes, upon filing of process fee, returnable on the next date of hearing.
11. It is noted that the copy of the impugned order placed on the file is not 4 "EOT"
W.P.(C) 18025/2024 Page 3 of 4This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/12/2024 at 22:35:18 complete. Mr. Wadhwa has handed over a complete copy of the same, which is taken on record. Petitioner shall file a true-typed legible copy of the impugned order within two weeks from today.
12. Re-notify on 10th March, 2025.
13. Dasti under the signatures of Court Master.
SANJEEV NARULA, J DECEMBER 24, 2024 d.negi W.P.(C) 18025/2024 Page 4 of 4 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/12/2024 at 22:35:18