Jammu & Kashmir High Court
M/S Onkar Bhalla And Sons Th. Its ... vs Union Of India And Others on 5 August, 2024
Author: Wasim Sadiq Nargal
Bench: Wasim Sadiq Nargal
Sr.No.115
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP (C ) No. 1835/2024
CM No. 4476/2024
M/S Onkar Bhalla and Sons Th. Its Director Rohit ....Appellant/Petitioner(s)
Bhalla
Through :- Mr. R.K. Gupta, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Udhay Bhaskar, Advocate.
V/s
Union of India and others ....Respondent(s)
Through :-
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE
ORDER
05.08.2024
01. Petitioner is aggrieved of impugned order No. 66546/SS/R-2/QE-DEC 2023/105/E8 dated 12.06.2024 issued by respondent No. 1, whereby he has been held incapable of handling more load and thus debarred from participating in the future tendering contracts by the department.
02. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that ever since its enlistment/registration of petitioner company as class "SS" contractor with the MES Department, the petitioner company has executed various contract works of the department to their entire satisfaction.
03. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that there is provision of quarterly review of the Works undertaken by the contractors. The procedure in this respect has been laid down in Chapter-IV of the Manual of Contracts. Section 33.2 of the said Chapter lays down complete mechanism and procedure as how the department reviews the progress of the contracts on 2 quarterly basis. As per Section 33.2, Work Load Return (WLR) is initiated by the department. Whereas, the work load return in respect of the contractors having total work load upto Rs 50.00 lac is issued by the Zonal Chief Engineer, the WLR in respect of the contractors having total work load of more than Rs 50.00 lac and upto Rs. 15.00 crores is issued by the Command Chief Engineer.
04. It is further submitted that it has been specifically provided in section 33.2
(vii) that in the event of any adverse remarks in the WLR in respect of any contract/contractor, the same shall be communicated/served by the accepting officer latest by 10th day of the last month of the quarter and copy of the same along with the reply of the contractor shall be enclosed with the WLR while forwarding the report to the competent authority for taking the final decision.
05. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that respondent Nos. 3 and 4 had to necessarily serve a show cause notice to the petitioner company, as he was recommending adverse report against the petitioner company and invite reply from the petitioner company forwarding the same to respondent no. 1 in order to enable him to take a final decision on WLR. The specific case of the petitioner is that respondent Nos. 3 and 4 had never issued any show cause notice before 10th of last month of quarter to the petitioner company before forwarding the recommendations to respondent no. 1 which is mandatory procedure to be followed and the same has been violated by the respondents
06. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits the issuance of the order impugned has debarred the petitioner company from participating in the tendering process for the allotment of the aforesaid contract works and thus the petitioner company is deprived of its right to participate in the tendering process and the allotment of the aforesaid contract works. Accordingly, the order 3 impugned is violative of Article 14, 19 & 21 of the Constitution, as the same tantamount to blacklisting the petitioner company without adopting the due procedure as envisaged under the MES manual on contracts.
07. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance upon identical order passed by this Court in WP (C) No. 997/2024 and he prays that the similar order be passed in the instant petition as well. With a view to maintain parity, this Court after having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record, deems it appropriate to grant similar prima facie relief in the instant case.
08. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable within a period of four weeks.
09. Requisite steps for effecting service of notice on the respondents be taken within one week.
10. List on 13.09.2024.
11. Meanwhile, subject to objections from other side and till next date of hearing, impugned order No. 66546/SS/R-2/QE-DEC 2023/105/E8 dated 12.06.2024 qua the petitioner shall remain stayed.
(Wasim Sadiq Nargal) Judge Jammu:
05.08.2024 Renu Renu Bala 2024.08.06 11:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document