Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rahul Saluja vs Food Corporation Of India on 20 April, 2023
Author: Chief Justice
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
WP No. 23814 of 2022
(RAHUL SALUJA Vs FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND OTHERS)
Dated : 20-04-2023
Shri Sankalp Kochar- Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Naman Nagrath - Senior Advocate with Shri Mukesh Kumar
Agrawal - Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2.
Shri Deependra Kumar Mishra - Advocate for respondent No.3.
I.A No.212 of 2023 is filed by respondents No.1 and 2 seeking to vacate
the interim order granted on 23.11.2022 and I.A No. 5259 of 2023 is filed by
respondent No.3 for the same purpose.
We have heard learned counsels.
In terms of the interim order dated 23.11.2022, an order was passed
staying the award of tender dated 27.10.2022 issued in favour of respondent
No.3 and all further proceedings thereto. The contention of the respondents is
to the effect that the petitioner was blacklisted by the order dated 16.11.2017.
The same was challenged by filing Writ Petition No.20920 of 2017 wherein an
interim order of stay of blacklisting was granted on 07.12.2017. So far as the
instant NIT is concerned, the last date of submission was 14.08.2022. The writ
petition was dismissed as being infructuous on submission made by petitioner's
counsel on 14.09.2022. Thereafter, when the technical bid was being evaluated,
the petitioner's tender was rejected on the ground that blacklisting order
subsists. Therefore, he could not have bid for the same. Questioning the same,
the instant petition has been filed.
The contention being advanced is to the effect that blacklisting was for
the period between 2017 to 2019 and a period of one year thereafter. That even
though an order of stay was granted in Writ Petition No.20920 of 2017, the
period of three years stood expired as on 16.11.2020. Therefore, the order of
blacklisting had spent itself. Once the order of blacklisting has spent itself, the
question of holding the same against the petitioner on the ground that there is no
adjudication is improper.
The same is disputed by the learned counsels for respondents on the
ground that the order of blacklisting has not been set aside. The order of
blacklisting has only been stayed. So, as and when the petition was dismissed
as withdrawn, the stay would have to stand vacated and the original order of
blacklisting would survive.
Therefore, the blacklisting would still have to continue for a further
period of time. Various judgments have been relied upon by both sides in
support of their respective cases.
I n the interregnum, on evaluation of the technical and financial bid,
respondent No.3 was awarded a tender by the order dated 27.10.2022. His
tender is for the purposes of transportation of foodgrains for District Katni in
the State of Madhya Pradesh. So far as the contention as to whether the order
of blacklisting that has been stayed would stand extinguished by efflux of time
after the period mentioned in the order of blacklisting or not is concerned, that
question requires determination by this Court. The further question as to when
the stay order is either vacated or petition is disposed off being infructuous,
whether the original order under challenge would revive itself or not requires to
be considered by this Court.
Presently, so far as the issue of the distribution of foodgrains in the
District of Katni is concerned, we do not think that the tender should be stayed
only for that purpose. The matter involves public interest inasmuch as
foodgrains requires to be transported in the District of Katni.
Under these circumstances, we are of the view that contention with
regard to the applicability of the stay order, its enforcement or otherwise will be
considered at the stage of final hearing. Under these circumstance, the order
dated 23.11.2022 granting stay of the award of the tender dated 27.10.2022 is
dissolved. All further actions by the respondents shall be subject to further
orders of this Court.
I.A Nos.212 of 2023 and 5259 of 2023 stand disposed off.
(RAVI MALIMATH) (VISHAL MISHRA)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
Prar
Digitally signed by
PRARTHANA
SURYAVANSHI
Date: 2023.04.21 19:38:21
+05'30'
