LAWS(PAT)-2000-1-32

ELITE ENGINEERING COMPANY Vs. BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

Decided On January 11, 2000
ELITE ENGINEERING COMPANY Appellant
V/S
BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner company with the prayer to quash office order No. 8 EB, dated 29-1-99 (Annexure 15), passed by the Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'), whereby the petitioner company has been ". . . blacklisted and all business dealings of B.S.E. Board with the firm and its associates are debarred". The petitioner company is a manufacturer of electrical equipment and has been a supplier to the Board for a long time.

(2.) Shorn of the details, the petitioner company had received orders from the Board for supply of 45 sets of Isolators of 132 KV of different amperes as per the exact specifications of the Board, vide letter No. Trans. 1032/95-03-EB, dated 18-2-97 (Annexure 1). It is manifest from this letter that the Board had prescribed detailed specifications according to which the petitioner had to manufacture and supply 45 sets of 132 KV Isolators to the Board made to meet the specific needs of the Board. Paragraphs 14 and 15 of the letter deals with the supplier's guarantees, and are set out hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference :-

(3.) The petitioner company had informed the Board that 15 out of the 45 sets were ready for pre-despatch inspection, and had requested for inspection by the functionaries of the Board, vide letter dt. 3-7-97 (Annexure 3). The Board by its letter dt. 14-7-97 (Annexure 4), had informed the petitioner company about deputation of an Electrical Executive Engineer for inspection. Accordingly, the inspection took place from 6-8-97 to 19-8-97 and 17-9-97 to 18-9-97, the 15 sets were qualitatively adjudged and approved by Ram Kripal Singh, Electrical Executive Engineer, vide his inspection report dt. 19-9-97 (Annexure 5). This test report will be of relevance when we discuss the issue relating to disciplinary proceedings by the Board against its officials. The Board had accordingly informed the petitioner company, vide letter No. 1477, dt. 25-9-97 (Annexure 6), that it had approved the aforesaid inspection report dt. 19-9-97 (Annexure 5), and had called upon the petitioner company to supply the 15 sets of Isolators of 132 KV. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the said letter are relevant in the present context, and are set out hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference :-