Disposed

S G Projects Ltd. through Its Director Ajay Singh v. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. through Its Managing Director

Jharkhand HC4 Feb 2021WPC/53/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought refund of EMD deposited with a tender. The court without adjudicating merits granted liberty to file a fresh representation and directed the respondent to refund the amount within two weeks if the claim was lawful.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file a fresh representation; refund of EMD directed within two weeks if lawful within two months.

S G Projects Ltd. through Its Director… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 53 of 2021

¶2

S.G. Projects Ltd., Kolkata, through its Director Ajay Singh

¶3

… … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., through its Managing Director, Khanij Nigam Bhawan, Doranda, Ranchi

¶6

The Managing Director, Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., Khanij Nigam Bhawan, Doranda, Ranchi … … Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶8

For the Petitioner : Ms. Aprajita Bhardwaj, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Rupesh Singh, Advocate -----

¶9

Order No. 02 Dated: 04.02.2021

¶10

The present writ petition is taken up today through Video conferencing.

¶11

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to forthwith refund the Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) to the extent of Rs. 24,00,000/- deposited along with the tender with respect to Request for Proposal as contained in RFP No. 11/2019 dated 31.08.2019, particularly in view of the fact that even after lapse of more than one year from the date of finalization of the tender, the said EMD deposited by the petitioner has not been refunded to it, which is violation of Clause 15.3 of the Request for Proposal as it provides for refund of EMD within 30 days of declaration of successful bidder.

¶12

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of prayer made in the writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer a fresh representation before the respondent no. 1. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no. 1 after providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, shall take an informed decision in the matter within a period of two months from the date of filing of the representation.

¶13

3. If the respondent no. 1 finds that the refund of EMD as claimed by the petitioner is lawful, the same shall be released in its favour within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶14

4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction.

¶15

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶16

Manish

S G Projects Ltd. through Its Director Ajay Singh v. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. through Its Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S G Projects Ltd. through Its Director Ajay Singh v. Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. through Its Managing Director

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

Kali Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

Karmu Ram Nayak Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

Ms Kamalalaya Colour Lab Studio through Its Authorised Signatory Cum Manager Sri Subhendu Neogi Vs State Bank of India through Assistant General Manager Stressed Assets Management Branch

Kumari Gaytri Vs State of Jharkhand

Smt Rajni Kaur Vs State of Jharkhand

Dr Sriram Pratap Sinha Vs the State of Jharkhand