Chattisgarh High Court
M/S Khajuraho Hybrid Pvt. Ltd vs Chhattisgarh Rajya Beej Avum Krishi ... on 7 November, 2023
Author: Parth Prateem Sahu
Bench: Parth Prateem Sahu
Page No.1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPC No. 4797 of 2023
• M/s Khajuraho Hybrid Pvt. Ltd. A Private Limited Company
Registered Under The Relevant Provisions Of Indian Companies
Act, Through Its Director Namely Shri Miilind Raj Singh, S/o. Shri
Dinesh Kumar Singh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o. Near Shiv Mandir,
Mahuwapara, Fundurdihari, Ambikapur, District - Surguja,
Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Chhattisgarh Rajya Beej Avum Krishi Vikas Nigam Limited Through
Its Managing Director, Beej Bhawan, Ravigram, Telibandha, Raipur,
District-Raipur,Chhattisgarh.
2. Managing Director, Chhattisgarh Rajya Beej Avum Krishi Vikas
Nigam Limited, Beej Bhawan, Ravigram, Telibandha, Raipur,
District-Raipur,Chhattisgarh.
3. Deputy General Manager (R.C.O.), Chhattisgarh Rajya Beej Avum
Krishi Vikas Nigam Limited, Beej Bhawan, Rabigram, Telibandha,
Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents
_________________________________________________________
For Petitioners : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate.
For Respondents : Mr. Prakash Tiwari, Advocate.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 07/11/2023
1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-
"10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to writ//writs, order/orders, direction/directions quashing the impugned orders dated 11.10.2023 (Annexure-P/1), passed by Deputy General Manager (R.C.O.), Head Office Raipur Page No.2 and order dated 11.10.2023(Annexure-P/2), passed by District Manager Raipur.
10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid fact and circumstances of the case."
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that petitioner was awarded the rate contract to supply Hybrid Maize seeds (notified) on 14.8.2203. Just before issuance of supply order, petitioner was served with letter dated 11.10.2023 restricting all business transactions with petitioner till conclusion of proceeding initiated based on complaint received against petitioner. He submits that petitioner was not issued any notice/letter prior to issuing the letter Annexure P/1 and therefore, it is arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice.
3. Learned counsel for respondents submits that upon receiving complaint that petitioner does not possess requisite qualification for becoming eligible to get the rate contract, the documents submitted by the petitioner were considered and thereafter, the letter was written to Junagarh Agricultural University, Junagarh, for verification and correctness of the documents placed by the petitioner as the documents submitted by petitioner were issued by the said University. However, the information has not been received till date and as soon as the information will be received, appropriate orders will be passed.
4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after Page No.3 getting the knowledge that some letter has been issued by the respondents to the Director of Research Junagarh Agricultural University, Junagarh, he has sought information from the petitioner and as per information received by him, on the date of receipt of letter itself, Junagarh University has forwarded the information to the respondents. He, however, submits that if the respondents are objecting with respect to receipt of the information from Junagarh University, the petitioner will place a copy of said information afresh before respondent No.3 and the respondent No.3 be directed to take decision afresh, considering the reply submitted by the petitioner.
5. I have heard learned counsel respective parties and perused the documents available on record.
6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was awarded rate contract for supply of hybrid vegetable seeds.
7. The documents enclosed along with writ petition would show that technical assessment of the documents submitted by the petitioner at the time of submission of bid was done by the Committee consisting six members and the petitioner was found to be eligible for participating in the proceeding of the rate contract. Submission of counsel for the respondents is that after completion of the proceeding and award of the rate contract, some complaint was received and then respondents sent letter to the Director of Research, Junagarh Agriculture University, Junagarh, asking for some clarification, but reply is awaited. Page No.4
8. In the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition, at this stage, permitting the petitioner to submit relevant documents including information forwarded by Junagarh Agricultural University, Junagarh before the respondents. In the event, the petitioner submits the documents, the respondent No.3 shall take decision afresh after verifying the facts expeditiously, preferably within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the reply.
9. Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Nisha