Allowed¶39

Avsar Charitable Trust v. Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Limited (Cgmsel)

Chhattisgarh HC8 Jul 2026WPC/3542/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GeM contract termination; natural justice; show cause notice proposing termination; adverse civil consequences; opportunity of hearing; clause-16 of contract; Avsar Charitable Trust v. Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Limited (Cgmsel); WPC No. 3542 of 2026; 2026:CGHC:28372-DB; order dated 30.06.2026 quashed; OT Tables and OT Lights; Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Medical College Raipur; Power Finance Corporation review; Rs. 2,79,45,000/- withheld amount claimed; liberty to proceed afresh.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 30.06.2026 terminating GeM Contract No.GEMC511687769329634 quashed; liberty reserved to respondents to proceed afresh in accordance with law after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner; no order as to costs ¶39

Avsar Charitable Trust Vs Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Limited (Cgmsel) — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶39

Issue for consideration

Whether the termination of GeM Contract No. GEMC511687769329634 by order dated 30.06.2026, passed without a specific show cause notice proposing termination and without affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, violates the principles of natural justice and is liable to be quashed

¶32

Court's answer

The impugned order of termination dated 30.06.2026 cannot be sustained; the notice dated 27.05.2026 merely sought an explanation in respect of alleged deficiencies and did not propose termination of the contract nor put the petitioner to notice that such harsh action was contemplated

¶35

Ratio / Principle

Where an order entails adverse civil consequences, notice must specifically indicate the action proposed so as to enable the affected party to effectively defend itself; admittedly, no such notice proposing termination was issued before the contract was terminated under clause-16

¶36

Key takeaways

The impugned order dated 30.06.2026 has been passed in complete violation of the principles of natural justice and is arbitrary and unsustainableratio¶38
The writ petition is allowed and the impugned termination order dated 30.06.2026 is quashed, with liberty reserved to the respondents to proceed afresh in accordance with law after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner; no order as to costsratio¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Division Bench, Ramesh Sinha, CJ and Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J) allowed WPC No. 3542 of 2026 filed by Avsar Charitable Trust challenging the termination/cancellation order dated 30.06.2026 issued by Respondent No.1 (Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Limited) cancelling GeM Contract No. GEMC511687769329634 for supply and installation of OT Tables and OT Lights at Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Medical College, Raipur. Held: the notice dated 27.05.2026 merely sought an explanation regarding alleged technical-specification mismatch and directed removal of equipment; it did not propose termination nor put the petitioner to notice of such harsh action. Where an order entails adverse civil consequences, notice must specifically indicate the action proposed so as to enable the affected party to effectively defend itself; no such notice was issued before termination under clause-16 of the contract. The termination was therefore passed in complete violation of the principles of natural justice and was arbitrary and unsustainable. Termination order quashed; liberty reserved to respondents to proceed afresh in accordance with law after affording proper opportunity of hearing; no order as to costs.

CGHC010259232026

2026:CGHC:28372-DB

NAFR

Digitally signed by INDRAJEET INDRAJEET SAHU SAHU Date: 2026.07.10 10:49:10 +0530

¶6

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

WPC No. 3542 of 2026

¶8

1 - Avsar Charitable Trust A (Registered Charitable Trust) Having Its Registered Office At D-1/500c First Floor Sangam Vihar New Delhi- 110002, Through Its Authorised Representative Mr. Deepak Goyal S/o Ashok Goyal Deepak Goyal S/o Ashok Goyal Aged 30 Years Resident Of D-1/500c, First Floor Sangam Vihar New Delhi 110002.

¶9

... Petitioner(s)

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Limited (Cgmsel) (An Undertaking Of Government Of Chhattisgarh) Through Its Authorised Representative Having Office At- Chhattisgarh Housing Board Business Complex Fourth Floor South East Corner Sector -27 New Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶12

2 - Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Medical College Raipur Through Its Dean Having Office At Jail Rd. Opp. Central Jail Moudhapara Raipur Chhattisgarh492001

¶13

3 - Power Finance Corporation Limited (A Government Of India Undertaking Through Its Chief General Manager (C S R) Having Registered Office- AtUrjanidhi 1 Barakhamba Lanc Connaught Place New Delhi- 110001

¶14

... Respondent(s)

¶15

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

¶16

For Petitioner : Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Sr. Advocate along with Shri Hari Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 : Shri Trivikram Nayak, Advocate.

¶17

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ramesh Sinha, CJ

¶18

Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J

Order on Board

09.07.2026

Per, Ramesh Sinha, CJ.

¶23

1 With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

¶24

2 The petitioner has filed this petition seeking following reliefs:

¶25

“a) Stay the operation, implementation and effect of the impugned termination/cancellation order dated 30.06.2026 issued by Respondent No. 1 whereby GeM Contract No. GEMC511687769329634 has been cancelled;

¶26

b) Restrain the Respondents from taking any coercive action against the Petitioner pursuant to the impugned termination order dated 30.06.2026 during the pendency of the present writ petition;

¶27

c) Release the withheld amount of Rs. 2,79,45,000/- to the Petitioner for the equipment supplied to Respondent No. 2; and/or

¶28

d) Pass any other order(s) or direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

¶29

3 Brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner was awarded GeM Contract No.GEMC-511687769329634 on 17.03.2026 by the Respondent No.1 for supply & installation of OT Tables and OT Lights at Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru Memorial Medical College, Raipur pursuant to a tender floated through GeM portal. The project was funded by Respondent No.3 under a Memorandum of Agreement dated 15.10.2025 executed with Respondent No.2, requiring compliance with the applicable government norms and procurement procedures. During execution of the contract, Respondent No.1 issued a communication dated 27.05.2026 alleging mismatch in the technical specifications of the supplied equipment and called upon the petitioner to furnish an explanation. The petitioner submitted a detailed reply denying the allegations and asserting that the equipment supplied are strictly as per the tender specifications. A review conducted by Respondent No.3 also found the equipment to be in compliance with the prescribed technical

¶30

¶31

specifications and recorded that the same was being regularly used by Respondent No.2, however, the Respondent No.1 passed the impugned order dated 30.06.2026 terminating the contract of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said action, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the termination order dated 30.06.2026.

¶32

4 Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that tender was floated through GeM portal after following the prescribed procurement process and the petitioner was awarded the contract after being found technically and financially eligible. Although the Respondent No.1 issued a communication dated 27.05.2026 alleging mismatch in the technical specifications of the supplied equipment and calling upon the petitioner to explain the same, the petitioner furnished a detailed reply stating that the equipments are as per technical specifications. Subsequent review conducted by the Respondent No. 3 also confirmed that the supplied equipment complied with the technical specifications, despite aforesaid facts, the Respondent No.1 proceeded to terminate the contract without issuing any show cause notice proposing termination or affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The impugned order, therefore, came to be passed in complete violation of the principles of natural justice. It was also submitted that before passing an order entailing civil consequences, a specific show cause notice indicating the proposed action is mandatory. Since no such notice was issued in the present case, the impugned order deserves to be quashed.

¶33

¶34

5 On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 does not dispute that for termination of the contract, there is lack of proper notice in accordance with tender condition, however, the contract was terminated on account of deficiencies noticed in the equipment supplied by the petitioner. Thus, no interference is called for.

¶35

6 Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that the impugned order of termination dated 30.06.2026 cannot be sustained. Although a notice dated 27.05.2026 was issued to the petitioner regarding alleged mismatch in technical specifications, however, the said notice merely sought an explanation in respect of alleged deficiencies and directed removal of the equipment. It did not propose termination of the contract nor did it put the petitioner to notice that such harsh action was contemplated.

¶36

7 The record further indicates that the petitioner submitted a detailed reply disputing the allegations. Further, as per review report of Respondent No.3 itself, the equipment supplied by the petitioner were found to be as per requisite specifications. Notwithstanding the same, the respondent proceeded to terminate the contract without issuing any specific show cause notice proposing termination or granting the petitioner an effective opportunity of hearing. It is well settled law that where an order entails adverse civil consequences, notice must specifically indicate the action proposed so as to enable the affected party to effectively defend itself. Admittedly, no such notice was issued in the present case before terminating contract issued in favour of

¶37

¶38

petitioner as per clause-16 of the said contract/agreement. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the impugned order dated 30.06.2026 has been passed in complete violation of the principles of natural justice and is arbitrary and unsustainable.

¶39

8 The writ petition accordingly stands allowed . The impugned order dated 30.06.2026 terminating GeM Contract No.GEMC511687769329634 is hereby quashed . However, liberty is reserved in favour of respondents to proceed afresh in accordance with law after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. No order as to costs.

¶40

Sd/Sd/(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶41

inder

Avsar Charitable Trust v. Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Limited (Cgmsel)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avsar Charitable Trust v. Chhattisgarh Medical Services Corporation Limited (Cgmsel)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahul Kumar Sinha Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Priya Mishra Vs University Grant Commission

Umesh Kumar Dewangan Vs Paramjeet Singh

Ayush Jain Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Prajjwal Pradeep Soni Vs Dr. Gurpreet Kaur

Dayanand Paswan Vs State of Chhattisgarh