ASHISH AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by reduction in rates of commodities with retrospective effect communicated to the petitioner vide Memo dated 26.10.2012 and 02.01.2013, the present writ petition has been filed.

(2.) Pursuant to Notice Inviting Tender for supply of food grains, green vegetables, potatoes etc. in Seraikella Jail for the period between 01.07.2012 to 30.09.2012, the petitioner submitted his bid and his bid was found the lowest. Accordingly, for supply of the aforesaid food articles to the Seraikella Jail for the 3rd quarter of the year i.e. from 01.07.2012 to 30.09.2012, the petitioner was awarded work order on the basis of the rate fixed by the Purchase Committee. Similarly, for supply of food grains, fresh vegetables, potatoes etc. for the Seraikella Jail, the petitioner was awarded work orders for the period between 01.10.2012 to 31.12.2012 also. The petitioner executed the work orders without any complain however, subsequently the Jail Superintendent, Seraikella Jail communicated to the petitioner the rate of foodgrains approved by the I.G. (Prison), Jharkhand whereunder, the rates for few items have been approved at reduced rates. Aggrieved, the petitioner submitted representation and under protest, he received the payment at reduced rates.

(3.) Mr. Sudarshan Shrivastava, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Clause 5 in Notice Inviting Tender which provides that the rates fixed by the Purchase Committee can be modified by the I.G. (Prison) is arbitrary. The respondents after the work order was successfully executed, cannot revise/modify the rate of food grains, vegetables etc. with retrospective effect, to the detriment to the petitioner. It is further submitted that in any case power under Clause 5 must be exercised by the I.G. (Prison) within a reasonable time and in no case, the rates approved by the Purchase Committee can be reduced by I.G. (Prison) after the supplies have been made.