SHREEJI INDUSTRIES Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, carries on business of manufacturing polyethelene bags. By public notice published in the Rajasthan Patrika, Jodhpur Edition, dated August 7, 1981, the State Government invited tenders for supply of polyethelene bags. In the tender the various requirements with regard to the physical and strength properties of the films used in the products were prescribed. In response to the said notice, the petitioner submitted his tender on 14th September, 1981. The petitioner also submitted a test report of his products obtained from M/s. I.P.C.L., Baroda. The tender of the petitioner for supply of goods was accepted and the petitioner executed an agreement and submitted the same before the State Government Thereafter, a Circular (Annexure P/3) No. 16/82 dated 16th March, 1981 was issued by the Store Purchase Officer, Central Store Purchase Organisation, Finance Department of the Government of Rajasthan (respondent no. 2 herein ), whereby the name of the petitioner vyas included amongst the suppliers of polyethelene bags for a period upto 30th September, 1982. The rates were prescribed in a separate order No. 10/82 dated March 16, 1982. By order dated 24th August, 1982 passed by respondent no. 2, the circular No. 16/82 and the order 10/82 dated 16th March, 1982 whereby the rate contract for supply of polyethelene bags upto 30th September, 1982 had been given to the petitioner was cancelled. In the said order, it is stated that on a re -examination by the technical committee of the test report submitted by the petitioner, it was found that the products of the petitioner were not satisfactory. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 24th August, 1982, the petitioner has filed this writ petition wherein the petitioner has prayed that a writ in the nature of certiorari may be issued to quash the order 24th August, 1982 and a writ in the nature of mandamus be issued directing the non -petitioners to accept the supply from the petitioner in terms of the agreement entered into between the petitioner and the non -petitioner uptil September 30, 1982.

(2.) IN the writ petition aforesaid, the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order dated 24th August, 1982 has been passed in disregard of the principles of natural justice in as much as the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity of being heard before the passing of the said order. The case of the petitioner is that since the impugned order adversely affects the interests of the petitioner, it was incumbent upon the non -petitioners to have given an opportunity of a hearing to the petitioner before passing the said order. The case of the petitioner is further that the test report that was submitted by the petitioner had been examined by the technical committee before the tender of the petitioner was accepted and that the non petitioners were estopped from questioning the quality of the products of the petitioner on the basis of the second report received from the technical committee and that, in any event, the report of the technical committee should have been disclosed to the petitioner before taking any action against the petitioner on the basis of the said report.

(3.) I have heard Shri J. P. Joshi, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate.