M/S Kamal Group vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 2439 Raj

[2023/RJJD/007073]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11924/2018

M/s Kamal Group, Through Its Proprietor Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Rawal S/o. Lacchi Ram Ji, By Caste Rawal, Age- 38 Years, Deldar, Tehsil Abu Road, District Sirohi (Rajasthan).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Rajasthan State Food And Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Managing Director, Rajasthan State Road And Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, 5Th Floor Kisan Bhawan, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302015 (Rajasthan).

3. Civil Supplies Manager, Rajasthan State Food And Civil Supplies Corporation, Hotel Aathiti Inn, Opposite Shubsh Park, Sirohi (Rajasthan).

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Rawal (Proprietor of the petitioner-Firm) present in person.

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Judgment

Reserved on 21/03/2023 Pronounced on 27/03/2023

1. The lawyers are abstaining from the work due to strike.

2. The petitioner, which is a proprietorship Firm, engaged in the

business of transportation and supply of food grains and other

allied activities, has preferred this writ petition under Article 226

of the Constitution of India, through its Proprietor, claiming the

following reliefs:

"It is therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this petition for writ in the nature of

[2023/RJJD/007073] (2 of 8) [CW-11924/2018]

Mandamus may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate writ / order or directions to the effect that:-

i) The order dated 27.07.2018 (Annex.- 11) may kindly be quashed and set aside.

ii) If any amount is recovered pursuant to the bank guarantee and performance security, the respondent be directed to refund the same.

iii) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner firm.

iv) Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner firm."

3. As the pleaded facts and the record would reveal, upon the

bids having been invited by the respondents for awarding a

contract (having tender value of Rs.1,95,49,692/-) for

transportation of sugar and wheat in various areas of Sirohi

District, the petitioner-Firm being desirous and eligible,

participated in the bidding process; being the highest bidder in the

bidding process, the petitioner-Firm was awarded the said contract

for a period of one year, and as required, the petitioner-Firm

furnished a bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.10,57,000/- and

other security in a sum of Rs.9,77,485/-.

3.1 In pursuance of the same, vide letter dated 25.04.2018, the

petitioner-Firm was called upon to execute an agreement with the

respondents, wherein it was provided and agreed upon that during

the contract period, the transporter (petitioner-Firm) shall furnish

all the information of the food grains and sugar, as supplied to the

Fair Price Shops, to the prescribed authority of the respondent-

Rajasthan State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation Limited.

[2023/RJJD/007073] (3 of 8) [CW-11924/2018]

3.1.1 It was also agreed upon that after collecting the food grains

and sugar from the godown of the Food Corporation of India (FCI),

if the same are not supplied to the Fair Price Shops, the

transporter shall be required to store the said food grains and

sugar in the godown, as certified by the respondent authorities,

and that the godown shall be operated through two keys, out of

which one shall be kept by the contractor (petitioner-Firm), while

the other shall remain in possession of the officer authorized by

the respondent authorities in that regard, so as to restrain

unilateral access to the food grains and sugar being kept in the

godown.

3.2 The petitioner-Firm, in pursuance of the said contract,

commenced the work. However, a notice dated 05.07.2018 was

received by the petitioner-Firm on 11.07.2018 issued by the

respondent No.3, stating therein that the petitioner-Firm was

called on various occasions to hand over possession of the

godown, so as to allow the necessary inspection by the

officers/officials of the respondents, but the petitioner-Firm did not

respond, and therefore, on 04.07.2018, the locks of the godown

were broken down and inspection was conducted thereat;

whereupon it was found that the quantity of the wheat is 541

quintals, whereas, according to the stock register, the same must

have been 888.565 quintals; it was also mentioned in the said

notice that in case the petitioner fails to reply the said notice, an

FIR would be registered against the petitioner-Firm. The

aforementioned notice was immediately replied by the petitioner,

denying the allegations levelled in the said notice.

[2023/RJJD/007073] (4 of 8) [CW-11924/2018]

3.2.1 The petitioner also filed a police complaint at Pindwara Police

Station against the then Civil Supplies Manager, on count,

amongst others, in regard to breaking down the locks of the

godown and illegally transporting the wheat; whereupon

immediately, the respondent authorities initiated an enquiry and

uponon conclusion thereof, the erring officials were ordered to be

kept under suspension.

3.3 However, on 13.07.2018, the then Civil Supplies Officer

lodged an FIR against the petitioner, which, as per the petitioner,

is still pending investigation.

3.4 On 23.07.2018, another notice was served upon the

petitioner mentioning therein certain irregularities on the part of

the petitioner-Firm, in execution of the contract in question; the

said notice was replied by the petitioner on 26.07.2018 denying

the contents of the said notice.

3.5. However, the Manager, Civil Supplies Department, Sirohi

issued an order dated 27.07.2018 to the petitioner communicating

the petitioner-Firm that on the count, amongst others, that upon

conclusion of the enquiry by the Sub Divisional Officer, Pindwara,

the petitioner-Firm was found guilty of disposing off the wheat and

furnishing of a forged rent deed of the godown, and thus, the

contract awarded to the petitioner-Firm stood terminated, while

forfeiting the security/bank guarantee, as furnished by the

petitioner, in regard to such contract. Hence, the present petition

has been preferred by the petitioner praying for the aforequoted

reliefs.

4. Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Rawal (Proprietor of the petitioner-Firm)

present in person submitted that in the impugned order, it has

[2023/RJJD/007073] (5 of 8) [CW-11924/2018]

been mentioned, amongst others, that the petitioner-Firm failed to

furnish satisfactory response to the various notices furnished by

the respondent authorities pointing out various irregularities in

execution of the contract in question; the same is apparently

incorrect, as the petitioner-Firm furnished reply to the notices,

while denying the allegations levelled therein on sufficient

grounds.

4.1 He further submitted that the impugned order has been

passed by the respondents, without any prior notice in regard

thereto and without affording an adequate opportunity of being

heard to the petitioner, and thus, the impugned order is violative

of the principles of natural justice.

4.2 He also submitted that it is only after realizing the blunder

being committed by the officials/officers of the respondents in

breaking down the locks of the godown behind the back of the

petitioner, that the aforementioned FIR was lodged by the then

Civil Supplies Manager on 13.07.2018; despite the fact that in

pursuance of the police complaint being filed by the petitioner, in

regard to breaking down of the locks of the godown and unilateral

inspection of the godown on 04.07.2018, the respondent

authorities, upon enquiry, passed an order suspending the

services of the erring officials.

4.2.1 He further submitted that the respondent authorities,

despite the fact that the FIR dated 13.07.2018 lodged by the

respondents, in regard to the alleged irregularities in execution of

the contract by the petitioner, is still pending investigation, the

respondents issued the aforementioned notice dated 23.07.2018,

alleging various irregularities on the part of the petitioner-Firm;

[2023/RJJD/007073] (6 of 8) [CW-11924/2018]

such notice was replied by the petitioner-Firm on 26.07.2018,

specifically stating therein that the petitioner-Firm continuously

provided the requisite information regarding supply of food grains,

and that, all the record in respect thereof was in possession of

certain employees of the respondent-Corporation.

4.3 He also submitted that the respondents themselves have

acted in utter violation of the terms and conditions of the

agreement by breaking down the locks of the godown and

unilaterally conducting the inspection, in the absence of the

proprietor/authorized representative of the petitioner-Firm.

4.4 He further submitted that had it been a case that the

impugned order was passed, due to the circumstances that

compelled the respondents to break down the locks of the

godown, so as enable them to conduct the necessary inspection

thereof, the respondent authorities ought to have issued prior

notice to the petitioner-Firm in that regard; as per the petitioner,

the same was not done at any point of time.

4.5 He thus submitted that the aforementioned backdrop clearly

reveals that the impugned action had been taken by the

respondents just to cover up the illegalities committed by their

own officers/officials, that too, without waiting for the conclusion

of the investigation into the FIR lodged by themselves; hence, the

impugned action of the respondents is nothing, but an arbitrary

exercise of power and authority, while committing flagrant

violation, amongst others, of the principles of natural justice.

5. Heard as well as perused the record of the case.

[2023/RJJD/007073] (7 of 8) [CW-11924/2018]

6. In the given factual matrix, this Court finds that the matter

pertains to irregularities in civil supplies, which is an issue

concerning the public at large.

6.1 The issues, as raised by the respondents, with regard to the

irregularities and misappropriation in question in execution of the

contract by the petitioner, are subject matter of the FIR lodged by

the respondents on 13.07.2018 before the Police Station,

Pindwara, District Sirohi, which as per the petitioner-Firm itself, is

still pending investigation.

7. Thus, in these circumstances, unless the final conclusion

report in regard to the said FIR is submitted before the competent

court by the concerned investigating agency, it would not be

appropriate for this Court to delve into the merits of the case and

enter into a fact finding enquiry; as, if the same is done, it may

affect and influence the ongoing investigation into the FIR in the

present matter, which is not permissible under the law. Moreover,

in case the petitioner wishes to bring certain documents on

record, in regard to the issues raised in the FIR lodged by the

respondents, the petitioner may furnish the same before the

concerned investigating authority, as the investigation into the

said FIR, as per the petitioner-Firm itself, is still pending.

8. In view of the above, this Court does not find it a fit case so

as to grant any relief to the petitioner in the present petition.

However, after filing of the final conclusion report, pertaining to

the FIR lodged by the respondents against the petitioner, by the

concerned investigating agency before the competent court, the

petitioner shall be at liberty to take appropriate recourse, as

available under the law.

[2023/RJJD/007073] (8 of 8) [CW-11924/2018]

9. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. All pending

applications stand disposed of.

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

SKant/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)