LAWS(CAL)-1968-12-3

REGIONAL DIRECTOR FOOD MINISTRY OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE EASTERN REGION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA Vs. ARJAN SINGH BHANGOO

Decided On December 19, 1968
REGIONAL DIRECTOR FOOD MINISTRY OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE EASTERN REGION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA Appellant
V/S
ARJAN SINGH BHANGOO Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is from the judgment and order of Mitra, J. dated 4 July 1988 making the Rule absolute against the appellants, the Regional director (Food), Ministry of Food and agriculture, Eastern Region, Government of India ; the Joint Director, Ministry of Food and Agriculture,. Government of India ; and the Union of india through the Secretary of Food and Agriculture. The Rule was issued calling upon the said respondents to show cause why a writ of Mandamus should not be issued commanding the said respondents to cancel and rescind and withdraw all orders and notices including the telegram dated 18 October 1987 and further commanding the said respondents to forbear from giving any further effect to the said telegram and orders and notices issued on the basis thereof.

(2.) THE respondent Arjan Singh bhangoo and Company made an application under article 226 of the Constitution against the aforementioned three respondents and Messrs. Saraf and Sbns requiring them, to show cause as to why a writ of Mandamus should not go to cancel and rescind the order and notices given including the telegram dated 18 October 1987. The respondent arjan Singh Bhangoo and Company hereinafter referred to as the respondent company, alleged in the petition the following facts :- The respondent company had been appointed contractor by the appellants for transport of food-grains in the year 1955. The respondent company's contract was from time to time the subject of fresh contracts for transport of foodgrains. The regional Director on 17 December 1966 invited tender for the appointment of contractor. Pursuant to that tender messrs. National Transport and Coal syndicate were appointed transport contractors with effect from 1 March 1967. For some reason National Transport and Coal Syndicate did not act as such contractor. The appellants made an offer to the respondent company. The respondent company said that they were willing to accept the said work if the contract was extended for one year, or, in the alternative, for two years from 1 March 1967. The respondent company in its letter dated 28 february 1967 in making the offer said that the terms and conditions contained in the tender dated 17 December 1966 would remain unchanged. The appellants by a telegram dated 7 March 1967 informed the respondent company of its appointment as transport contractor on terms indicated in the respondent company's letter and that the appointment was for two years from 1 march 1967. The appellants thereafter called upon the respondent company to furnish security deposit in accordance with the terms of the contract.

(3.) ON 17 June 1967 the Regional director invited tender for appointment of contractor for a period of two years. The last date of receipt of the said tender was 19 July 1967 and the tender was to be opened on 19 July 1967 at 3-30 P. M. Tenders were to remain open for acceptance upto and inclusive of 18 October 1967. On 19 July 1987 tenders were opened. On 20 July 1967 the respondent company wrote to the appellant that the tender that was handed over by the respondents m/s. Saraf and Sons at 3-15 P. M. was tendered 15 minutes later than the stipulated time which was 3. 00 P. M. on 19 July 1967. It was further alleged that the tender of respondent M|s. Saraf and sons was made without deposit of earnest money.