VIMAL CONSTRUCATION CO Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the petitioner for an appropriate writ, direction or order quashing and setting aside a decision of the State Government, respondent No.1 of blacklisting the petitioner vide a Circular Memorandum dated 16th April, 1999 at Annexure `Q' to the petition and a consequential communication dated 3rd May, 1999 issued by the Executive Engineer,Project Division III, Himatnagar,respondent No.2, Annexure `P' to the petition, and by restraining the respondents , their agents, servants and nominees from taking any action on the basis of the above decisions .

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that it is a partnership firm duly registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 doing business in construction work . On 15th September , 1990, a work-order was given to the petitioner for execution of work of construction of Canal Syphone at Branch Canal B.3 on Amravati river. The cost of construction was Rs. 23.85 lacs. Duration for the work was 12 months. After completing necessary formalities , the petitioner started the work and according to him, it was completed and everything was done in accordance with law. It was further case of the petitioner that all bills were paid to the petitioner including the final bill which was paid on 2nd March, 1994. It was stated by the petitioner that a certificate regarding satisfactory completion of work was issued in his favour on 8th August, 1994 .

(3.) Since the petitioner wanted to get its name registered for upgradation in the Government work, an application was made to the State Government through Executive Engineer, Himatnagar to enter the name of the petitioner in the list of contractors ,Grade A. After considering the application and the works undertaken by him, the application was granted and on 20th December, 1995, a decision was taken by the State Government to enter the name of the petitioner by upgrading it to Grade A. The Executive Engineer, accordingly informed the petitioner vide a communication, dated 2nd January, 1996 that its application was granted. It was valid for three years. It was further the case of the petitioner that on 27th May, 1998, another application was made by him to get his name entered in Grade AA. But no decision was taken by the State Government so far.