Delhi High Court
Darshan Chadha Prop. Of M/S Chadha ... vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr. on 15 February, 2019
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of order: February 15, 2019
+ W.P.(C) 1296/2019, C.M. Appl. No. 5874-5875/2019
DARSHAN CHADHA PROP. OF
M/S CHADHA SPORTS (REGD.) ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Mahendra Singh, Mr. Karmvir
Singh, Advocates
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondent
Through: Sh. Ramesh Singh, Standing
Counsel, GNCTD with Ms. Nikita
Goyal, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
ORDER
% 15.02.2019
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J. (ORAL)
1. Relying upon the order made by this court on 23.01.2019 in
W.P.(C) No. 737/2019, which had stayed the effect of the order made
by Sports Authority of India (through Letter dated 27.08.2018)
debarring it on account of failure to rectify the defects in connection
with another contract, the petitioner contends that its bid for laying of
synthetic hockey surface with other miscellaneous works for
development of Sports facilities at Government Girls Senior
Secondary School, Jhilmil Colony, ought to have been considered.
The petitioner was one of the competitors and had furnished its bid. In
the meanwhile, on 27.08.2018, in the course of performance of
ongoing contract, Sports Authority of India, issued a notice/order of
debarment. This was later confirmed on 26.11.2018. Since the
petitioner's bid /NIT was to be considered, the Govt. of NCT of Delhi
issued a letter on 29.10.2018 to the Sports Authority to ascertain the
correct status with respect to the contract that was in controversy.
Upon confirming from the Sports Authority that the issue of
debarment was in force, the Govt. of NCT of Delhi rejected the bid of
the petitioner as non-compliant - primarily on the ground of
debarment order. The rejection was made known to the petitioner on
29.11.2018 when its financial bid was not proceeded with. The Govt.
of NCT of Delhi, which is represented in the court today, states that
the contract was in fact awarded to a third party on 14.12.2018 (when
the letter of intent was issued) and the contract was formally executed
by the parties on 21.12.2018.
2. The petitioner contents that the rejection of its bid entirely
based on the debarment order is arbitrary and that the Govt. of NCT
of Delhi should have proceeded to evaluate it on the merits both on
the technical and the financial aspects. The petitioner relies upon the
decision of the Supreme Court to say that the Sports Authority's order
is unenforceable and void since it was not given any hearing or show
cause notice.
3. This court is of the opinion that the petitioner had at the stage
of the bid rejection, accepted that position (as on 29.11.2018 and
further on 14.12.2018 - when the LOI was formally issued). In fact,
the petitioner requested and was granted the refund of its security
deposit as is evident from its communication to the respondent -
Govt. of NCT of Delhi on 01.12.2018. The entire basis of the
petitioner's claim in these proceedings is that the debarment order was
suspended but that event occurred subsequently, i.e. 23.01.2019 after
the petitioner had accepted the bid rejection and even sought refund of
its end. In these circumstances, this court is satisfied that the present
case is not one where judicial review can be properly granted.
4. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
PRATEEK JALAN, J
FEBRUARY 15, 2019
pkb
