Disposed

Ms Mecon Ltd. through Its General Manager Sri Tej Pratap Chopra v. the Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Power

Jharkhand HC6 Jul 2018WPC/1188/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand disposed of the writ petition challenging the termination of a contract and invocation of a bank guarantee by directing the parties to utilize the Administrative Mechanism for Resolution of CPSEs Disputes under the relevant Office Memorandum.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; parties directed to resolve dispute via Administrative Mechanism for Resolution of CPSEs Disputes.

Ms Mecon Ltd. through Its General Manager Sri Tej… — Company and Corporate | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 1188 of 2018

¶3

M/s Mecon Ltd., Ranchi through its General Manager (Contract/Claim/Town Administration) … … Petitioner Versus

¶4

The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Power, Govt. of India, New Delhi

¶5

M/s NTPC Ltd., through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, New Delhi

¶6

The Director (Projects), NTPC Ltd., New Delhi

¶7

The General Manager (Contracts), NTPC Ltd., Noida, Uttar Pradesh

¶8

The Head of Project, NTPC Ltd., North Karanpura STPP, Hazaribagh

¶9

The Executive Director (North Karanpura), NTPC Ltd., Super Thermal Power Project, North Karanpura, Tandwa, Chatra

¶10

DGM (Civil), NTPC Ltd., Super Thermal Power Project, North Karanpura, Tandwa, Chatra

¶11

The Senior Manager, Union Bank of India, Doranda, Ranchi

¶12

The Chief Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd., Commercial Banking, Jamshedpur ... … Respondents

¶13

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶14

----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Sr. Advocate Mr. Shray Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent-UoI : Mr. Devanand Kumar, CGC For Respondent Nos. 2 to 7 : Mr. A.K. Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Prashant Pallav, Advocate For the Respondent No. 8 : Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Advocate Mr. Rohan Kashyap, Advocate Mr. Nandan Prasad, Advocate

¶15

-----

¶16

Order No. 06

¶17

Dated: 06.07.2018

¶18

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the letter dated 24.02.2018 (Annexure-23 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent- M/s NTPC Ltd., whereby the contract for “External Coal Handling Package for North Karanpura STPP” has been terminated and the bank guarantee submitted by the petitioner has been invoked without issuance of any show-cause notice to the petitioner. Further prayer has been made for a declaration that the act and action of the respondent-M/s NTPC Ltd. in invoking the bank guarantee is illegal and arbitrary as there was no reason to invoke the same. The petitioner has also prayed for refund of the bank guarantee invoked by M/s NTPC Ltd.

¶19

2. A supplementary affidavit dated 04.07.2018 has been filed

¶20

¶21

on behalf of the respondent-M/s NTPC Ltd. bringing on record an office memorandum dated 22.05.2018 issued by the Ministry of Heavy Industries & Public Enterprises, Department of Public Enterprises, Government of India for settlement of commercial disputes between the Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs)/Port Trusts inter se and also between CPSEs and Government Departments/Organizations (excluding disputes concerning Railways, Income Tax, Customs & Excise Departments) through Administrative Mechanism for Resolution of CPSEs Disputes (AMRCD).

¶22

3. In view of the issuance of the said office memorandum dated 22.05.2018, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner as well as M/s NTPC jointly submit that they are ready to get the dispute resolved through the aforesaid mechanism as both are the Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs).

¶23

4. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will be taking due steps in view of the procedure prescribed in the office memorandum dated 22.05.2018.

¶24

5. In view of the aforesaid submission of the learned Senior Counsel for the parties, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of. It is expected that the bodies/the committees mentioned in the office memorandum dated 22.05.2018 shall take prompt steps for resolving the dispute as per the procedure laid down therein.

¶25

I.A. No. 3228 of 2018 and I.A. No. 3229 of 2018 also stand disposed of.

¶26

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶27

Manish

Ms Mecon Ltd. through Its General Manager Sri Tej Pratap Chopra v. the Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Power

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms Mecon Ltd. through Its General Manager Sri Tej Pratap Chopra v. the Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Power

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Telco Workers Union through Its General Secretary Prakash Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dr Swarali Krishna Kondwilkar Vs Union of India through the Pr Secretary Department of Health and Family Welfare

Employer In Relation To The Management Of Uco Bank Through Asst General Manager Vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Wahid Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Parvez Alias MD Perwez Vs the State of Jharkhand

M/S Central Coalfields Limited through Its General Manager Vs Shri Suka Oraon