INDER KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 10.7.1999 and 30.6.1998. The petitioner has also sought writ of certiorari for quashing the above two orders and has sought directions in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to give effect to the above two orders contained in Annexures-1 and 2 respectively in the writ petition. The petitioner has further sought directions in the form of mandamus commanding the respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in the contracts ignoring the above two orders and to release his outstanding payments to the petitioner.

(2.) The brief facts relevant to the present writ petition are that the petitioner firm is engaged primarily in taking Government contracts pertaining to constructions and repair of buildings. As contended by the petitioner it has been successfully performing the said business for the last several years. The petitioner is registered with the respondents (Annexure-3 to the writ petition). In respect of certain works assigned to the petitioner by the Head Quarter's Commander Works Engineer pertaining to "Special Repairs to Married J.C.O./C.R.'s Quarters" executed by the petitioner in the year 1996-97, a show cause notice dated 9th June, 1998 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) was issued alleging the sub-standard works having been done by the petitioner. The petitioner in his reply dated 29th June, 1998, had explained asserting that the entire work had been performed strictly in accordance with the specifications given to the petitioner, and that after completion of the work, the Garrison Engineer had inspected the same and had thereafter issued a completion certificate. It was further asserted in his reply dated 29.6.1998 (Annexure-IV to the writ petition) that no defect had been pointed out at the time of inspection and the indication to the breakage of window pane etc. could not be attributable to the petitioner, which might have and broken on account of user of the quarters after handing over the same by the petitioner. The petitioner has further contended that after receipt of the reply, on the very next day i.e.. 30th June, 1998 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) an order was passed by the Commander, Works Engineer whereby, the business dealings with the petitioner were suspended and the name of the petitioner's firm had been removed from the approved list of Contractors allegedly for certain lapses in execution of C.A. No. C.W.E. L.K.O/E./10 of 96-97 without the opportunity of hearing having been given to the petitioner prior to the passing of the order dated 30th June, 1998.

(3.) Being aggrieved from the above order dated 30.6.1998 the petitioner filed a Writ Petition No. 3029 M/B of 1998 primarily on the ground that it was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. The said writ petition was disposed of on 21.5.1999 by this High Court with a direction to the respondent to expedite the appeal of the petitioner preferred against the order dated 30.6.1998 which was pending disposal. The petitioner had in the memo of appeal specifically complained that the order dated 30th June, 1998 suspending business dealings with petitioner was an order of black listing and consequently it was incumbent upon the Commander, Works Engineer to have afforded an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Consequent upon the order passed by this Hon'ble Court, the appellate authority i.e,, the Chief Engineer. Lucknow Zone, rejected the appeal by an order dated 10th July, 1999 in a non-speaking terms and without assigning any reasons. In respect of the specific plea of the petitioner, the appellate authority made the following observations :