[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
M/S. Neta Security Services Pvt. Ltd vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opposite ... on 5 February, 2026
Author: Murahari Sri Raman
Bench: Murahari Sri Raman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 3480 of 2026
M/s. Neta Security Services Pvt. Ltd., .... Petitioner
Bhubaneswar
Mr. Milan Kanungo, Senior Advocate
assisted by Mr. Soumya Ranjan Mohanty, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. Kailash Chandra Kar, Government Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
ORDER
Order No. 05.02.2026
03. W.P.(C) No. 3480 of 2026 & I.A. No.2140 of 2026
1. Admittedly, the petitioner was awarded a contract for
supply of Diet Services (Dry, Liquid, Cooked) to the Indoor Patients
in the previous year. The period of engagement is shown in the
agreement entered into by and between the parties to be one year and
extendable for another one year, provided the performance of the
petitioner on due assessment is satisfactory.
2. The petitioner submitted the representation before the
expiration of the original period of engagement disclosing the
documents, which corroborates the performance to be above board
and to the fullest satisfaction of the authorities. But keeping such
representation in a suspended animation, a fresh tender is floated by
the authorities, which is challenged in the instant writ petition.
3. Mr. Kailash Chandra Kar, learned Government Advocate
appearing for the authorities-opposite parties, on instructions,
submits that the engagement of the petitioner is extended till the
finalization of a new supplier and, therefore, there is no prejudice
caused to the petitioner. He arduously submits that the period of
engagement is for one year and, therefore, it does not vest any
absolute right into the petitioner to seek for its extension of another
one year. He, however, submits that the petitioner misbehaves with
the authorities, which led the decision to be taken by the authorities
to float a fresh tender.
4. The petitioner has annexed the performance remarks given
by a Competent Authority on a monthly-wise basis, which is
corroborative of the fact that the service provided by the petitioner is
found to be good, very good and sometimes excellent. Though there
appears to be some remarks to improve the delivery time but we do
not find any remark on a bare reading of the same that the
performance is below the average.
5. Be that as it may, we do not feel to usurp the power of the
Administrative Authorities in arriving at the subjective satisfaction
of the performance of the petitioner. We cannot overlook the fact
that keeping the said writ petition pending, the authorities have
proceeded to float the fresh tender.
6. Once the engagement period is extendable for a life period
depending upon the contingencies as provided therein, it is an ardent
duty of the authorities to take a conscious decision. A solitary
instance of a misbehavior as alleged by the authorities has to be
looked into and, therefore, we feel that the authorities should file an
affidavit disclosing the particulars of such misbehaviour, which led a
decision to be taken for floating the fresh tender.
7. Since we find the documents available in the instant writ
petition that the performance of the petitioner appears to be
satisfactory, we feel that the petitioner is entitled to an interim
protection. The authorities are restrained from proceeding further on
the basis of the impugned tender until the next date of listing.
8. The authorities are directed to file counter affidavit within
one week from date; rejoinder if there be any, shall be filed within
three days from the date of the service of the copy of the counter
affidavit upon the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
9. List this matter on 19th February, 2026.
(Harish Tandon)
Chief Justice
(M.S. Raman)
Judge
Sisira
Signed by: SISIRA KUMAR BEHERA
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 10-Feb-2026 18:45:48
