1 2025:CGHC:6769-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 706 of 2025 Ashok Kumar Mittal (Engineer And Contractor) S/o Piroji Lal Mittal Aged About 60 Years R/o HIG-2, M.P. Nagar, Niharika Road, Korba, District Korba, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, C.G. 2 – Engineer-In-Chief, Department Of Water Resources, Shivnath Bhawan, Sector-19, North Block, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, C.G. 3 - Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Hasdeo Ganga Kachhar, Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. 4 - Superintending Engineer, Water Resources Department, Shyam Barnai Project Division, Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. 5 - Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Division No. 1, Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr.Prince Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr.Shashank Thakur, Deputy Advocate General BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Digitally signed by BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Date: 2025.02.07 10:13:03 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 06.02.2025 1. Heard Mr.Prince Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr.Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the respondents/State. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with following prayers: “i. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to issue the work order in favour of the petitioner, in respect of the subject tender, as he is L-1 in the said tender process. ii. Cost of the petition may also be granted in favour of the petitioner. Iii. Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a registered 'A' class contractor having Unique Identification No.CGeR01707 and under this registration he will be able to participate in all tenders. The petitioner is having turn over of Rs.25.00 crores and duly registered with the GST. In the field of Engineering & Contractor the petitioner is having good experience and reputation and discharged various works of several departments with great 3 sincerity and honesty and with utmost satisfaction of the authorities concerned and never earned any adverse remarks. 4. It is submitted that the respondent authorities floated the NIT No.07/SAC/2023-24 dated 31/8/2023 System Tender No.145978 for the project namely; Mand Diversion Scheme. The name of work is "For earth work of main canal I/C repair of weir & construction of CC Channel 1260 M I/C 4 Nos. Aquaduct & 105 Nos. Structures in R.B.C. of Mand Diversion Scheme". 5. It is submitted that probable amount of contract is Rs.2933.02 lacs and the amount of earnest money is Rs.5.00 lacs. Time allowed for completion of work is 24 months (including rainy season) from the date of issuance of work order. The date, time schedule details of the bid are (1) bid start date 8/9/2023; (2) bid due date 22/9/2023; and (3) bid open start date 25/9/2023. In pursuance to the said NIT, the petitioner, who is having the requisite eligibility criteria, submitted its tender form within stipulated time period and also deposited the earnest money of Rs.5.00 lacs through FDR of UCO Bank in favour of the Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division No.01, Ambikapur, bearing FDR No.866044 and the same has been submitted along with the OnLine tender form and same has been uploaded in the online portal as per rules. Despite lapse of the tender opening date, no information has been provided by the authorities to the petitioner with regard to status of his tender form. However, subsequently, by letter dated 27/6/2024 4 (Annexure P/4) the respondent No.3 informed the petitioner that though in the tender process he found L-1, however, since he failed to submit the receipt of hard copy of TDR for Rs.5.00 lacs, his tender form is liable to be rejected and he should be blacklisted and the petitioner was directed to submit his response within seven days. 6. In response to the said letter dated 27/6/2024, the petitioner submitted his reply on 1/7/2024 (Annexure P/5) and categorically stated that he has already deposited the earnest money of Rs.5.00 lacs through FDR No.RAI/FDR/001-866044 dated 22/9/2023 of UCO Bank and prayed for issuance of work order in his favour. Thereafter, by letter dated 25/10/2024 (Annexure P/6) the respondent No.5 informed the petitioner that since he failed to submit the TDR within time, as per clause 2.1.5(A) of the tender document, in physical form, the same has been forfeited in favour of the State Government and the tender document of the petitioner has been cancelled. In fact the petitioner has submitted the TDR/FDR of Rs.5.00 lacs in favour of the respondent well within time and also submitted the same along with OnLine tender form, but the said fact has not been appreciated by the authorities and only on purely technical grounds the impugned action has been taken on ex-parte basis that too without affording due opportunity to the petitioner, which is illegal, arbitrary and not at all sustainable in the eyes of law and by letter dated 29/10/2024 (Annexure P/7) the petitioner requested the respondent No.5 for 5 issuance of work order in his favour as he is L-1 in the tender process and the requisite documents along with FDR of Rs.5.00 lacs submitted along with the tender form well within time as stipulated in the tender documents. Thereafter, the respondent No.5 by its letter dated 5/11/2024 (Annexure P/8) directed the petitioner to make further correspondence in respect of the subject matter with the respondent No.3, as the said authority is dealing with the matter. Hence, this petition. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned action on the part of the respondents is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the law applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. The petitioner has submitted the TDR/FDR of Rs.5.00 lacs in favour of the respondent well within time and also submitted the same along with OnLine tender form, but the said fact has not been appreciated by the authorities and only on purely technical grounds the impugned action has been taken on ex parte basis that too without affording due opportunity to the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner requested for issuance of work order in his favour as he is L-1 in the tender process and the requisite documents along with and FDR of Rs.5.00 lacs submitted along with the tender form well within time as stipulated in the tender documents. He also submits that the petitioner cannot be deprived from the tender process as he is having the requisite eligibility criteria and also submitted the tender form along with the documents and TDR/FDR of Rs.5.00 6 lacs, which has been drawn in favour of the respondent authorities from UCO Bank. As such, the writ petition deserves to be allowed and the respondents authorities be directed to issue the work order in favour of the petitioner as he is L-1 in the said tender process. 8. On the other hand, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the respondents/State submits that it was online tender and bid was opened on 15.12.2023 and the petitioner was lowest bidder and he was required to submit a physical copy of TDR within a period of seven working days. He further submits that mail was sent to the petitioner on 15.12.2023 at 2.20 P.M. in which it has been mentioned that tender has been opened. He also submits that since it is online tender and tender has been opened and the petitioner should be vigilant to the fact that what was his position. He also submits that on 27.09.2024 the entire tender proceedings have been cancelled and thereafter subsequent NIT issued by the respondents authorities has also been cancelled. He fairly submits that the TDR of Rs.5,00,000/- will be released by the respondents to the petitioner. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order and other documents appended with writ petition. 10. Considering the fact that entire tender proceedings, in which though the petitioner was declared L-1 and according to the respondents he has not submitted the physical copy of TDR within 7 the stipulated time, has already been cancelled by the respondent authority on 27.09.2024 and also considering the fact that a show- cause notice was issued to the petitioner for blacklisting, we deem it appropriate to quash the issuance of show-cause notice for blacklisting of the petitioner and direct the respondents authorities to release the TDR / FDR of Rs.5,00,000/- submitted by the petitioner in favour of the respondents and the petitioner is permitted to participate in fresh tenders. Order accordingly. 11. With the aforesaid observation / direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. No cost(s). Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Bablu