MADAN LAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners seek quashing of the impugned order dated 29th March, 1996 of the respondent No. 3 debarring the petitioners from submitting tenders for the period of three months with effect from 29th March, 1996. This order shall also govern the disposal of the Writ Petition Nos. 1749 to 1762 of 1996 as the petitions raise common questions of facts and law.

(2.) Brief facts leading to filing of these petitions are that the petitioners were enlisted as Contractors in the Irrigation and Flood Control Deptt. of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and became eligible to submit tenders in any of the divison of I & F. The respondent No. 3 arbitrarily and wrongfully delisted the petitioners from submitting tenders for a period of three months with effect from 29.3.96 vide Memorandum dated 29th March, 1996 (at page 16 of the paper book) and that too without giving of an opportunity to be heard. It is contended that the impugned order is violative of the principles of natural justice and as such the same is liable to be quashed.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 filed the counter affidavit, which is taken on the record. It is stated in the counter filed on behalf of the respondent No. 3 that the respondent/Deptt. invited tenders for work of excavation of suplementary drain from RD 12740 M to RD 13500 M (below SSWN) and upto a level of 207 M. The estimated cost of the work was in the region of about Rs. 18.73 lakhs. In all 31 contractors tendered for the work and tenders were opened by the Executive Engineer on 25.5.1995. The opening of the tenders revealed that the tenderers had formed a cartel amongst themselves and had quoted higher rates with a view to defraud the Government exchequer. Complaints were received by the Government with respect to the cartelisation resorted to by the tenderers. A preliminary inquiry was made which confirmed the said fact and accordingly tenders were rejected by the Superintending Engineer, Supplementary Drainage, Circle I on 11.10.1995. It is further stated in the counter that on account of the cartelisation resorted to there has been consequent inordinate delays in the implementation of the works that were required to be done by excavating the drain, solely as a result of the action of the contractors. Consequently, the petitioners were de-listed for three months vide impugned order. According to the respondent the suspension being an interim measure pending full investigation and final decision it was not necessary at that stage to comply with the principles of natural justice by resort to issuance of a show cause notice and/or for calling an explanation.