LEARN NATURE CONSULTANTS Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ application assails order dtd. 27/4/2015 passed by Respondent No. 5 cancelling the contract agreement executed between the parties on 27/3/2012. The writ petition also seeks payment of money dues for works done under the same alongwith interest.

(2.) The Respondents proposed to establish a Jungle Safari over 202.87 hectares of land located over more than one village what is now described as Naya Raipur. Pursuant to publication of the Notice Inviting Tender (hereinafter called 'the NIT') the Petitioner's bid was found to be most suitable and it was appointed as Consultant on 2/3/2012. A formal agreement was executed between the parties on 27/3/2012 and work order was issued. The Petitioner was required to prepare master plan, detailed project report alongwith supervision and development of the Jungle Safari. The Petitioner raised bills on 17/12/2012 which were partially paid. It raised further bills on 22/5/2013 and 29/5/2014 which have not been paid. On 27/3/2012, it was given a notice to show cause why the contract be not terminated. After consideration of the cause shown, the impugned order has been passed.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the order of cancellation has been issued malafide by Respondent No. 5. The Petitioner has completed his part of the works under the contract and submitted both the master plan and the detailed project report. There was no justification whatsoever for cancelling the entire contract after the same. The cancellation of the contract is but only a ruse evident from the fact that it is only after completion of the works that Respondent No. 5 has sought to raise issues with regard to the eligibility for selection of the Petitioner as Consultant including the competency of the authority to release payments. It was next submitted that the notice for termination has been issued under Clause 6.12 of the contract. Availability of an arbitration clause is inconsequential as Clause 6.16 provides that an appeal may lie but the decision of the Conservator of Forest will be final and binding on both the parties. If the finding of the Conservator of Forest is final and binding, the result of the arbitration is a forgone conclusion. Additionally, if the order of the Conservator of Forest attains finality, obviously it is outside the purview of the arbitration clause. It was lastly submitted that at no point of time before issuance of the show cause notice or cancellation of the contract any notice or show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner alleging any delay, deficiency or insufficiency in performance or for any other reason under the contract. Respondent No. 5 has wrongly taken work from another agency GEC Structurals Consultant and Contractors regarding those assigned to the Petitioner and made payments to it from the funds which ought to have been paid to the Petitioner legitimately for the works completed by him.