Uttarakhand High Court
Chirag Service Provider vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 14 May, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MS. RITU BAHRI
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH THAPLIYAL
14th May, 2024
WRIT PETITION (M/B) No.218 OF 2023
Chirag Service Provider ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others ...Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Mr. D.S. Patni, learned senior
counsel.
Counsel for State/1, 4, 5 and 6 Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Standing
Counsel.
Counsel for respondent nos.2 and Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel
3.
JUDGMENT :
(per Ms. Ritu Bahri, C.J.)
The petitioner has challenged the
cancellation of the contract vide order dated
09.08.2023, Annexure no.11, to the writ petition.
2. A perusal of the order, at page 68 of the
paper-book, shows that proposal for cancellation of
the tender awarded to the petitioner was mentioned
in the Resolution passed by the Board with full
majority, keeping in view the Resolution passed by
the Board on 26.07.2023, and further keeping in
view the strike by the employees engaged in both
the contracts with respect to the cleaning system of
the city has been completely disrupted, and
thereafter the complaints were made by the people
of the city continuously.
3. This cancellation order has been challenged
by the petitioner on the ground that before
cancellation, no opportunity of hearing was given to
the petitioner, and no reasons have been given, why
this tender has been cancelled.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner
has also placed on record Annexure no.8, the order
dated 31.07.2023, whereby the Committee had been
constituted by the District Magistrate. This Court on
03.04.2024, had given time to the State to inform us
as to what steps has been taken by the District
Magistrate pursuant to the order dated 31.07.2023,
Annexure no.8.
5. Learned counsel for the State has informed
today that the District Magistrate, Udham Singh
Nagar, has taken a decision on 12.04.2024, and in
this report, it has been stated that the petitioner did
not carry out the instructions in the contract
awarded to him on 15.05.2023. In this backdrop, as
per the bills produced by the Company, it proposes
to cut certain amount from the bills, and if in future
the conditions are not carried out/or are not
followed, the proposal for penalty can also be
imposed.
6. Since the Department has conducted the
inquiry and has given the opportunity to the
petitioner to carry out the work as per the
guidelines/conditions in the contract on 15.05.2023,
this writ petition, at this stage, is being disposed of
giving liberty to the petitioner as well as to the
respondents to go by the order dated 12.04.2024.
The impugned order dated 09.08.2023, is set aside.
keeping in view the order dated 12.04.2024, passed
by the District Magistrate, whereby certain
conditions have been referred to, which will be
imposed on the petitioner, if he does not follow the
conditions of the contract dated 15.05.2023, and
petitioner will also have a liberty to approach the
District Magistrate, in accordance with law.
7. Subject to the aforesaid, the writ petition
stands disposed of.
______________
RITU BAHRI, C.J.
___________________
RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.
Dt: 14th May, 2024
NR/
