RAKESH SACHDEVA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking setting aside the order dtd. 17/10/2024 (Annexure - P/1) and 24/2/2022 (Annexure - P/2) as also the decision dtd. 15/2/2022 (Annexure - P/8) and further seeking a direction towards the respondent authorities to treat the petitioner not blacklisted for future contracts on the basis of order dtd. 24/2/2022. The petitioner also seeking a direction towards the respondent authorities to take action against the responsible officers and employees.

(2.) (i) Facts of the case, in short, are that the petitioner was declared L-l for food supply work in Government Hospital, Raipur, but due to some personal difficulty petitioner shown his inability to execute the work and requested to refund of security amount of Rs.1.00 lac, but vide order dtd. 24/2/2022 petitioner was imposed with penalty of Rs.1.00 lac and his deposit was forfeited. Since the petitioner got other tender works, he has not challenged the forfeiture order and, as such, it attained finality.

(3.) (a) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since the petitioner withdrew his candidature from L-1 status, therefore, earnest money amounting to Rs.1,00,000.00 deposited by the petitioner was forfeited and communication dtd. 24/2/2022 in this regard was made to him by the respondent No.3. Subsequently, in the year 2024, when the petitioner participated in the tender process of District Dhmtari, then vide Annexure P-2, he was informed that he has been blacklisted by the same order i.e. 24/2/2022, but in the earlier communication (page 26) made to the petitioner, the fact of blacklisting of petitioner has not been mentioned. He would further submit that if the impugned order would have been informed the petitioner well within time he would have challenged the same earlier itself, as the same is for indefinite period and not in accordance with the terms of tender condition.