M/S. TULSI ENTERPRISES Vs. ADMINISTRATOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The scope present appeal can be reduced to a short compass. Pursuant to an advertisement for doing certain jobs in the concerned government department, the appellant No. 1 participated in the tender process. His bid was found to be the lowest and the same was accepted. Bills raised by the appellants were party paid and for non-payment of the balance amount, the appellants had filed a writ petition.

(2.) During the pendency of the writ petition, the respondents had published a notification in a local newspaper blacklisting the present appellant as a Government Supplier. This was challenged by a separate writ petition. The learned Single Judge by the order impugned in this appeal had dismissed the second writ petition inter alia, holding that the points raised in the writ petition could not be decided in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as they were factual in nature. According to the learned Single Judge the factual disputes could only be resolved in a civil suit. The learned Single Judge accepted the stand taken by the respondents to the writ petition that the performance of the appellants was far from satisfactory and that there was a shortfall in the work executed as the real cause for blacklisting the appellant No. 1 as a Government contractor.

(3.) The learned Single Judge also observed that previously also the petitioner filed a writ petition and that was also disposed of with direction to approach the appropriate forum.