Kumari Himani vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4531 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                        Letters Patent Appeal No.197 of 2020
     ======================================================

Kumari Himani Wife of Prashant Kumar, present Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Sasaram, P.S. Sasaram (T) District- Rohtas.

... ... Appellant/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, New Secretariat, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram.

3. Standing Committee, Nagar Parishad, Sasaram, through its Chairman.

Respondent 1st set

4. M/S Supreme Enterprises, a Company having its registered office at E05 Ashok Nagar, Road No. 14 (B), Kankarbagh, Patna, Bihar through its Authorized Representative Mr. Hars Vardhan Singh.

Respondent 2nd set

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sudama Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Yogendra Prasad Sinha (Aag7) Mr. Gopal Krishna Agrawal Mr. Kumar Ravish, Advocates For respondent no. 4 : Mr. Mrigank Mauli, Sr. Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR) (The proceedings of the Court are being conducted through Video Conferencing and the Advocates joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residence.)

Date : 08-09-2021 I.A. No.1 of 2021:

This interlocutory application has been filed by the

appellant for condoning the delay of 72 days in preferring the

present LPA.

For the reasons, as stated in aforesaid interlocutory

application, the delay in preferring the present LPA is condoned. Patna High Court L.P.A No.197 of 2020 dt.08-09-2021

I.A. No. 1 of 2021 stands allowed.

LPA No.197 of 2020:

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Being aggrieved by judgement and order dated

15.11.2019 passed in C.W.J.C. No.14964/2019 passed by

learned Single Judge of this Hon'ble Court, appellant has

preferred this L.P.A.

Briefly stated the facts of the case is that respondent

no.4 was awarded contract for supply of desilting machine and

dump tank being the lowest bidder and work order dated

21.3.2016 was issued for supply of the machines and in

pursuance of which, he purchased the machinery, however, on

25.10.2017, the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Sasaram

terminated the work order without issuing any show cause or

assigning any reason, against which, respondent no. 4

represented and on 25.4.2018, the Empowered Standing

Committee called a meeting and a decision was taken to revive

the work order and said decision was approved by the Board in

its meeting on 18.06.2018.

After hearing both the parties, learned Single Judge

in the operative part of the order has held as follows:-

"In the opinion of this Court, once the Board has

approved the decision of the Empowered Standing Committee Patna High Court L.P.A No.197 of 2020 dt.08-09-2021

to revive the work order, the Executive Officer of the Nagar

Parishad, Sasaram had unnecessarily delayed the execution of

the order of the Board by sitting over the matter. He has taken a

plea with reference to Annexure 'A' to the counter affidavit but

the perusal of the Annexure 'A' does not inspire much

confidence with the reasons shown by the Executive Officer,

Nagar Parishad, Sasaram. It is not disputed that the petitioner

happened to be the lowest bidder and for that reason he was

declared successful and a work order was issued in his favour.

Execution of agreement is now a mere formality which has to be

completed and the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad should

have proceeded to call upon the petitioner to execute the

agreement. There is no reason as to why he/she would call upon

the Chairman of the Nagar Parishad to revisit the revival order

for insignificant reasons when work order had already been

issued earlier and revival order has been consciously taken by

the Empowered Standing Committee and approved by the

Board.

In the aforesaid view of the matter, both the writ

applications are hereby allowed. The Executive Officer, Nagar

Parishad, Sasaram (Respondent No. 3) is directed to issue

necessary revival order and after restoring the work order of the

petitioner he/she would call upon the petitioner to execute the

agreement which the petitioner will do without any delay.

Respondent No. 3 shall complete all these formalities within a

period of 30 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy Patna High Court L.P.A No.197 of 2020 dt.08-09-2021

of this order Respondent No. 3 shall proceed to give effect to the

work order and the agreement and take delivery as per the work

order.

Both the writ applications are, thus, disposed off with

the aforesaid directions.

This Court does not find any error or infirmity in the

order passed by the learned Single Judge requiring any

interference by this Court.

The LPA is, accordingly, dismissed

(Sanjay Karol, CJ)

( S. Kumar, J)

Sanjay/-

AFR/NAFR              NAFR
CAV DATE              NA
Uploading Date        10.09.2021
Transmission Date     NA