Z PLUS SURAKHYA SEVA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner, which is a registered partnership firm, seeks to quash Annexure-6, the letter dtd. 28/9/2022 terminating the contract, and also to issue direction to opposite party no.3 to renew the contract for another one year.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case, in a nutshell, is that opposite party no.3 had issued a notice on 26/8/2021 inviting sealed tenders from the registered and experienced agencies/firms for providing manpower services in BPUT, Rourkela. The period of contract for providing aforesaid service was ideally for two years from the date of effectiveness of the contract, which can be extended for a period of one year depending upon the performance of the service provider and at the discretion of the authority. The authority had reserved the right to terminate the contract at any point of time after giving 30 days notice to the service provider. Pursuant to such tender call notice dtd. 26/8/2021, the petitioner and other bidders submitted their bids.

(3.) Mr. B.P. Pradhan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the order dtd. 28/9/2022 terminating the contract of the petitioner has been passed by the authority without assigning any reason and, as such, the same has been done without giving 30 days prior notice to the petitioner as per the agreed terms and conditions. It is further contended that the reasons, which have been assigned in the counter affidavit by the opposite parties, are not germane nor can the same validate the order impugned, therefore, the order impugned cannot be sustained in the eye of law and is liable to be quashed.