KAVERI INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD Vs. DELHI JAL BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition is the tenth round of litigation between the parties on the same subject, over a short span of two years. The petitioner company has sought quashing of the order dated 28. 3. 2008 passed by the respondent, Delhi Jal Board (DJB) debarring and blacklisting the petitioner from participating and/or being considered for any fresh tender to be issued by the DJB till such time, the outcome of the investigations being carried out by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is made known to the DJB whereafter, the said decision would be reviewed. The second prayer in the writ petition is for directions to the DJB to consider the petitioner company for applying for tenders that may be floated by it, subject to fulfillment of eligibility criteria.

(2.) AS the case has a chequered history, before proceeding to deal with the issues raised, it is necessary to encapsulate the relevant facts and revisit the earlier series of litigation. The petitioner company carries on the work of laying of water pipes, sewer pipes, water and waste water management, in collaboration with a United Kingdom based company, for the civic agencies, like the respondents. On 9. 11. 2004, a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT)was issued by the respondents inviting expression of interest for pre-qualifying the firms for renovation of old pipeline. The petitioner company applied for the said tender and was ultimately awarded the said work. Part of the work under the contract was completed. In the meantime, the CBI registered FIR on 23. 4. 2007 against Mr. Vijay Kumar Kataria, managing Director of the petitioner company, Mr. Rakesh Mohan, CEO of the respondent authority and the son-in-law of Mr. Rakesh Mohan on the ground that the contract was awarded to Mr. Vijay Kumar Kataria when Mr. Rakesh Mohan was the CEO of the respondent, for extraneous considerations and that he was instrumental in purchase of immovable property for the son-in-law of Mr. Rakesh Mohan in USA, which formed the consideration for awarding the contract in favour of the petitioner company.

(3.) ON 1. 6. 2007, the Board of the DJB passed a resolution prohibiting the petitioner company from being awarded any tender of the DJB and from participating in the tender process. This was followed by issuance of a circular dated 25. 6. 2007 by the DJB, giving effect to the aforesaid resolution of the Board. The relevant extract of the aforesaid Circular is reproduced herein below for ready reference: ". . . After detailed deliberation it was decided that in all fairness the firm may not be allowed to participate in any fresh tender or may not be considered for award of any new work, which is yet to be awarded, till the said CBI case is finally decided. "