[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Pricewaterhousecoopers Private ... vs Dialogue And Development Commission Of ... on 23 March, 2026
$~14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 15532/2022 and CM APPL. 48313/2022, CM APPL.
39118/2023
Date of Decision: 23.03.2026
IN THE MATTER OF:
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS
PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Anuj Berry, Mr.
Shiv Johar, Ms. Jayati Sinha, Mr.
Shreedhar Kale, Advocates.
versus
DIALOGUE AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF DELHI &
ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr Sameer Vashisht (SC for
GNCTD), Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
JUDGEMENT
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL)
1. The petition is for following reliefs :
(a) Issue a writ of certiorari or appropriate writ, order or
direction quashing and setting aside the Impugned Show
Cause Notice dated 14 October 2022 bearing number
F.7(1I)/VC/DDCD/2021/Pt. File/2074-78 issued by the
Respondent No. 1; and
(b) Pass any other order/direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court
Signed By:AMIT KUMAR Signed
Signing Date:27.03.2026 By:PURUSHAINDRA
16:47:13 W.P.(C) 15532/2022 Page 1 of 3 KUMAR KAURAV
may deem appropriate in the facts and circumstances of this
case.
2. The Petitioner is a private limited company engaged in providing
consultancy and advisory services. Respondent No. 1- Dialogue and
Development Commission of Delhi (hereinafter 'DDCD'), is a policy think
tank under the Government of NCT of Delhi.
3. The impugned Show Cause Notice (hereinafter 'SCN') dated
14.10.2022 is challenged, on the ground that there is no privity of contract
between the petitioner and DDCD.
4. It appears that, at the instance of DDCD, the National Informatics
Centre Services Incorporated (hereinafter 'NICSI') had furnished a list of
empanelled consultants, pursuant to which petitioner, was invited by DDCD
to participate in the process and to make presentations regarding the
proposed assignment.
5. Subsequently, the petitioner was found to be suitable for performance
of the necessary work and, accordingly, the DDCD required NICSI to issue
the work order in favour of the petitioner. However, it appears during the
course of discussions, certain issues were raised regarding the scope of
work, commercial terms, etc, and for such reasons, the petitioner seems to
have shown its inability to undertake the said work.
6. The DDCD, thereafter, issued the SCN on the ground that the
petitioner was the empanelled consultant with the NICSI and it was
incumbent upon the petitioner to have performed the work as was directed
by the DDCD.
7. It is an admitted position that no formal work order was issued and no
concluded contract came into existence between the petitioner and DDCD,
Signed By:AMIT KUMAR Signed
Signing Date:27.03.2026 By:PURUSHAINDRA
16:47:13 W.P.(C) 15532/2022 Page 2 of 3 KUMAR KAURAV
consequently, in the absence of any privity of contract or enforceable
obligation on the part of the petitioner to perform the work, this Court finds
that it was not incumbent upon DDCD to issue the SCN.
8. If the petitioner was empanelled with NICSI and, if according to
NICSI, there has been any violation of the empanelment terms, the NICSI, is
fully empowered to take the appropriate recourse in accordance with law.
The action at the instance of DDCD is wholly without jurisdiction.
9. The Court vide Order dated 14.11.2022, has already stayed the
operation of the SCN. In view of these circumstances, the impugned SCN
issued at the instance of the DDCD stands set aside. The NICSI shall,
however, be at liberty to take appropriate recourse in accordance with law, if
it so requires.
10. With the aforesaid directions, the petition, along with pending
applications, stands disposed of.
(PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV)
JUDGE
MARCH 23, 2026/aks.
Signed By:AMIT KUMAR Signed
Signing Date:27.03.2026 By:PURUSHAINDRA
16:47:13 W.P.(C) 15532/2022 Page 3 of 3 KUMAR KAURAV
