M/S Cobra Industrial Security Forces ... vs The State Of Bihar on 12 May, 2020

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Patna High Court - Orders

M/S Cobra Industrial Security Forces ... vs The State Of Bihar on 12 May, 2020

Bench: Mohit Kumar Shah

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5636 of 2020
                 ======================================================
                 M/s Cobra Industrial Security Forces (India) Ltd.,

                                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s    :      Mr.Nirbhay Prashant, Adv.
                 For the Respondent-Stat :      Mr. Md. Nadim Seraj, G.P. 5
                 For the Respondent Beej Nigam: Mr. Sourendra Pandey, Adv.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   12-05-2020

RE: I.A. No. 1 of 2020 (Modification) The aforesaid Interlocutory application has been filed for modification/ clarification of the order dated 04.05.2020 passed in CWJC No. 5636 of 2020 whereby and whereunder the petitioner seeks modification of the operative portion of the said order to the effect that the operation of the blacklisting order dated 13.04.2020, pertaining to the petitioner firm, may be restricted to the Bihar Rajya Beej Nigam Ltd. instead of the entire State of Bihar.

Heard Shri Nirbhay Prashant, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Nadim Seraj, the learned G.P. 5 for the State and Shri Sourendra Pandey, the learned counsel appearing for the Bihar Rajya Beej Nigam Ltd.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5636 of 2020(3) dt.12-05-2020 2/4 At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the statement made in paragraph No. 6 of the present interlocutory application and he submits that on account of un-intentional inadvertence such statement has been made and there is no such infirmity in the order dated 04.05.2020 passed by this Court. The prayer made by the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner is accepted and the registry is accordingly directed to delete paragraph No. 6 of the present I.A. No. 1 of 2020 by striking out the same.

The Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the impugned order dated 13.04.2020, passed by the Managing Director, Bihar Rajya Beej Nigam Ltd., by which the petitioner has been blacklisted for three years from participating in tenders is illegal and has been passed without any authority of law inasmuch as there is no provision under the agreement entered into between the writ petitioner and the respondent Bihar Rajya Beej Nigam Ltd. whereby the Bihar Rajya Beej Nigam Ltd. can resort to the action of blacklisting the petitioner firm. Hence, it is prayed that during the pendency of the writ petition, the operation of the impugned order dated 13.04.2020, by which the petitioner has been blacklisted for three years from participating in tenders, be stayed. Patna High Court CWJC No.5636 of 2020(3) dt.12-05-2020 3/4 This Court finds that all the aforesaid arguments had been advanced on the earlier occasion by the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner on 04.05.2020, whereafter interim order was passed in the following terms:-

" In view of the peculiar circumstances prevailing on account of lock-down due to COVID-19 pandemic, I deem it fit and proper to direct that the operation of the impugned order dated 13.04.2020, as far as blacklisting of the petitioner firm is concerned, shall remain restricted to the State of Bihar till the next date of hearing. It is further directed that in case the Bihar Rajya Beej Nigam Limited has not en-cashed the bank guarantee/EMD, though stated to have been forfeited, the same shall not be en-cashed till the next date of hearing, however, the writ petitioner shall be obliged to keep the bank guarantee in question, alive."

This Court finds that there is no ambiguity in the aforesaid interim Order dated 04.05.2020 so as to warrant any modification muchless any clarification, hence there is no occasion to consider the said I.A. No. 1 of 2020 (Modification) Patna High Court CWJC No.5636 of 2020(3) dt.12-05-2020 4/4 and infact the same is not maintainable.

Nonetheless, this Court directs that the aforesaid interlocutory application, filed by the petitioner, shall be considered along with the main writ petition on the date already fixed i.e 29.06.2020. In the meantime, the respondents may file reply to I.A. No. 1 of 2020, if so advised.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Tiwary/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Patna High Court - Orders