1 2025:CGHC:55385-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5654 of 2025 Santosh Agrawal S/o Radheshyam Agrawal Aged About 46 Years R/o Ward No. 15, Lailunga Road Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department of Urban Administration Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Collector Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 3. Chief Municipal Officer Nagar Panchayat Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Deputy Advocate General. For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Shikhar Shukla, Advocate. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.11.13 18:12:26 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 13.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for respondents No. 1 & 2/State and Mr. Shikhar Shukla, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 3. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1 To kindly pleased to quash/set aside the notice of inviting tender vide dated 07.10.2025 issued by Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Gharghoda, District Raigarh (C.G.) (Annexure P/1). 10.2 To kindly make any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.” 3. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashment of the resolution and subsequent actions of the Nagar Panchayat, Gharghoda, whereby the works allotted to the petitioner pursuant to work orders dated 20.12.2024 were allegedly cancelled and a fresh Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) was issued on 07.10.2025. 3 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an agreement was executed between the petitioner and the Nagar Panchayat, Gharghoda, for construction of (i) a shed in Ward No. 10 near the temple, and (ii) a pathway in Ward No. 12. It is contended that the Nagar Panchayat did not provide the requisite layout plans necessary for execution of the works, due to which the petitioner could not commence the construction. Despite this, the petitioner was served with a notice dated 03.04.2025 to start the work. The petitioner, vide reply dated 04.04.2025, requested that the layout be supplied and also sought payment of dues for previously completed works. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that without furnishing the layout or considering the petitioner’s reply, the Nagar Panchayat proceeded to hold a meeting and took a decision to cancel the contract, and subsequently issued a notice dated 04.09.2025, directing the petitioner to submit a reply. The petitioner submitted a detailed reply on 11.09.2025, yet without deciding upon the said reply or issuing any formal termination order, a fresh NIT was issued on 07.10.2025, which is alleged to be arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 submits that as per the agreement dated 15.12.2024, the works were to be completed within a period of two months and the contractor was bound by that timeline. It is further contended that the petitioner failed to commence the work even after repeated notices and reminders, compelling the council to pass a resolution dated 19.08.2025 to terminate the contract. 4 Subsequently, a fresh tender was issued to ensure timely execution of public works. 7. We have heard learned counsel for both sides and perused the record carefully. 8. It is not in dispute that no formal order of termination of the contract was ever issued to the petitioner before floating the fresh tender. The record also indicates that the petitioner had been requesting the layout of the works to be executed, and the same was not provided prior to the issuance of the impugned NIT. 9. Once the petitioner had raised specific grievances regarding non- supply of layout and had filed a detailed reply dated 11.09.2025, it was incumbent upon the Nagar Panchayat to consider the same and pass a reasoned order before taking any adverse decision affecting the petitioner’s contractual rights. The issuance of a fresh NIT, without cancelling the petitioner’s existing work order through a formal and reasoned order, reflects a failure to adhere to the principles of natural justice. 10. The record further reveals that even respondent No. 3, in its return, has admitted that no formal termination order was passed before the NIT was issued. Thus, the subsequent tender process cannot be sustained in law. 11. Accordingly, the Notice Inviting Tender dated 07.10.2025 issued by the Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Gharghoda, is hereby quashed qua the petitioner, with liberty to respondent No. 3 to proceed 5 in accordance with law after following due procedure and affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. 12. In view of the above discussion, the writ petition stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan