ELECTRO INSULATORS Vs. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE first petitioner (M/s. Electro Insulators) is presently the sole proprietary concern of Janakkumar Indulal Vyas. The concern was earlier a partnership firm which had Janakkumar Indulal Vyas and Subodhbhai Natwarbhai Trivedi as partners when the contract in question was awarded to the firm on 16. 01. 2006.

(2.) UNDER the above contract awarded by respondent No. 2 " Dakshin Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the second respondent"), the petitioner was required to supply Kit Kat fuses in the following three different categories :-<FRM>JUDGEMENT_163_TLGJ0_2008Html1.htm</FRM> It is the petitioners' case that after the above contract was awarded to the petitioners, there was sudden spurt in the price of copper which was the major raw material for making Kit Kat fuses in terms of the value of the raw materials. On account of such sudden spurt in the price of copper sometime in April 2006, it was impossible for the petitioners to supply the contract quantity. The petitioners, therefore, went on requesting the officers of the second respondent to give suitable price rise because the price of copper had shot up almost 2. 5 times. The officers of the second respondent, however, did not pay any heed to the said request and, therefore, the petitioner could not supply the contract quantity. It appears that the petitioner could supply only 31% of 63 Amp Kit Kat fuses, 40% of 100 Amp Kit Kat fuses and 21% of 200 Amp Kit Kat fuses. On that ground, the second respondent"company has passed the impugned order dated 14. 12. 2007 treating the petitioners' failure to supply ordered material of contract as a breach of contract, ordering recovery of amount of Rs. 35. 60 lacs towards the difference of price as per the quoted cost and the present market rate at the risk and cost of petitioner No. 1 and also ordering to stop dealings with petitioner No. 1 and the partners of the firm for a period of three years from the date of the impugned order. The order further indicates that it was also decided to debar petitioner No. 1 from supplying their products as accessories or bought out items for any supplies to be made by any vendor to the second respondent or holding Company i. e. Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. and its subsidiary.

(3.) AT the first hearing of this petition, Mr Tushar Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioners had submitted that apart from the impugned order dated 14. 12. 2007 imposing harsh penalties on the petitioners for failure to supply the ordered quantity, which failure was only on account of reasons beyond the control of the petitioners, petitioner No. 1 is also being subjected to further penalty of being debarred from consideration for supply of various sizes of Kit Kat fuses to Madhya Gujarat Vij Co. Ltd. (third respondent ). The petitioner is being treated as technically not qualified for the tender proceedings being conducted by the third respondent " Company on the ground that the petitioner had failed to supply the ordered quantity to the second respondent and was accordingly debarred by the impugned order dated 14. 12. 2007. It was also the contention of the petitioners that the second respondent had agreed to cancel the similar contract in favour of another party and the second respondent had thereafter agreed to purchase Kit Kat fuses at a much higher price after taking into consideration the rise in the price of copper.