RAMDEV PCV PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. CHIEF ENGINEER, MATERIAL CELL (C), GUJARAT WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the purpose of challenging the legality, validity and propriety of an order dtd. 18/6/2022.

(2.) Brief facts leading to filing of present petition are that petitioner is a approved vendor of Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board (GWSSB) having its registration from 27/4/2021, provided by respondent and validity thereof is upto 25/4/2024. Petitioner has undertaken various projects and pursuant to certain purchase orders received from EPC contractor, pipes of various diameters were supplied for district Botad and Bakaskantha. Respondent by letter dtd. 6/1/2022 issued notice to petitioner by referring to the Chief Engineer, WASMO letter dtd. 22/9/2021 bearing letter No.440 and letter No.3 dtd. 4/1/2022- GIRDA. A joint inspection report was also prepared on 17/9/2021 as also CIPET inspection report dtd. 17/12/2021 and by referring to this, it has been informed to petitioner that certain samples failed to meet the prescribed parameters as per the sample reports and thereby respondent called upon the petitioner to clarify within 5 days, failing which punitive action was proposed to be taken for debarment/ cancellation of vendor approval. It is the case of the petitioner that along with that notice, documents which were referred to have not been provided and only through email dtd. 7/1/2022, a joint inspection report of GIRDA dtd. 17/9/2021 and inspection report of CIPET dtd. 17/12/2021 were provided.

(3.) Petitioner vide letter dtd. 12/1/2022 informed the respondent about technicality and requested to send said sample for retesting. Simultaneously, petitioner received a letter from respondent authority on 20/1/2022 and issued the same as final notice calling upon the petitioner to submit its reply as to why punitive action should not be taken against the petitioner. Against this final notice, petitioner offered its reply dtd. 25/1/2022 and undertook the exercise of replacing the defective pipes within the stipulated period and requested the respondent not to initiate any punitive action which may damage the image of petitioner on the ground it is a reputed company. It is the case of petitioner that since oral request of retesting was not accepted, petitioner by way of letter dtd. 9/2/2022 provided the test result of pipes having same batch number and found positive result indicating no infirmity in the pipes supplied and as such, once again petitioner requested the respondent authority to give one chance of witness test and in case, test result fails, petitioner undertook to replace all the pipes supplied. The respondent authority neither replied to the said notice nor considered the request of petitioner for witness test and as such, petitioner returned the amount received from EPC contractor and took back the pipes from both sites, i.e. Botad and Banaskantha. Petitioner has indicated in the petition that a circular was issued by the respondent authority dtd. 18/2/2022 whereby a joint inspection report was required to be obtained in case of dispute with respect to supply of pipes and its quality. However, no such opportunity was given to the petitioner though specifically requested not only in writing but also verbally. It has been stated that after pipes were supplied on or after 6/1/2022, in various districts of State of Gujarat through EPC contractor for WASMO, there appears to be no complaint whatsoever about quality of pipes supplied by petitioner from any of the districts. It is only Botad and Banaskantha districts, which raised the issue of defective quality but still with a view to resolve the issue, petitioner took back the pipes though result for the same batch was positive. In spite of such clarification and replies dtd. 12/1/2022 as well as 25/1/2022 and despite pipes having been taken back, still the authority by an order dtd. 18/6/2022 in an arbitrary manner removed the name of petitioner from the approved vendors list of GWSSB and debarred petitioner from participating in any tender to be invited by GWSSB/ GWIL/ WASMO for a period of one year from the date of issuance of said order and it is this order passed by the respondent authority which has been questioned in the present petition before us.