Disposed

Naquee Ali Khan v. the State of Jharkhand Thro the Secretary Food Public Distribution and Consumer Affairs Department

Jharkhand HC4 Apr 2024WPC/864/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners' appointment as Transportation-cum-Handling Agent for PDS food grain delivery was cancelled without show cause notice. As the agreement's validity expired before decision, the court declined to examine the cancellation's legality but directed consideration of their representation for dues and damages by the Deputy Commissioner with hearing and reasoned order.

What the court decided

AI extract

Naquee Ali Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 864 of 2024

¶3

¶4

Naquee Ali Khan

¶5

Abu Nazir ...Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Food, Pubic Distribution and Consumer Affairs Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶8

The Deputy Commissioner, Chatra

¶9

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Chatra

¶10

The District Supply Officer, Chatra

¶11

The Block Supply Officer, Chatra

¶12

The Block Development Officer, Chatra ...Respondents

¶13

¶14

CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan

¶15

---

¶16

For the Petitioners : M/s. Prem Pujari & Jyoti Nayan, Advs. For the Resp.-State : Md. Shahabuddin, S.C. VII

¶17

05/04.04.2024 Heard Mr. Prem Pujari assisted by Ms. Jyoti Nayan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Md. Shahabuddin, learned S.C. VII. 2. In this writ application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the order as contained in Memo No. 110 dated 01.02.2024, by which the work order issued vide Memo No. 912 dated 05.10.2023, through which the petitioners were appointed as Transportation-cum-Handling Agent, for carrying out the work pertaining to Door Step Delivery of the food grains to be distributed under the Public Distribution Scheme, stood cancelled unilaterally without issuance of any show cause notice and in violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioners have further prayed for a direction upon the respondents to permit them to carry out the work in terms of the work order as contained in Memo no. 912 dated 05.10.2023.

¶18

Briefly stated the facts reveal that the petitioners had participated in the tender process initiated by the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra, for selection of Transportation-cum-Handling Agent whose primary duty was to transport the food grains from the Godowns of the Jharkhand State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation to the respective dealers for its onward distribution to the consumers / Ration Card holders under Public Distribution System. The petitioners were declared successful bidders and accordingly were awarded

¶19

¶20

the work pertaining to transportation and handling of food grains in the block of Tandwa and Simaria in the district of Chatra, vide order as contained in Memo no. 912 dated 05.10.2023. Consequently, an agreement was entered into on 05.10.2023. The validity of the agreement was till 31^st March, 2024.

¶21

It is the case of the petitioners that though they were discharging their duties as Transportation Agent consequent to the work order issued to them and had never violated any of the terms and conditions of the agreement but vide order dated 01.02.2024 without any show cause notice to the petitioners, the concerned respondents had cancelled the agreement and without issuing a fresh tender had allotted the work to another contractor.

¶22

It has been submitted by Mr. Prem Pujari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the cancellation of the agreement was done unilaterally by the respondent No. 4 and prior to such cancellation, the petitioners were not issued any show cause notice and the entire process leading up to the impugned order dated 01.02.2024 was in complete violation of the principles of natural justice. It has been submitted that some dues are still left to be paid by the respondent no. 4 to the petitioners and in fact the petitioners have also claimed the damages for the period of two months during which time the petitioners were prevented from carrying on the transportation of the food-grains under the Public Distribution System.

¶23

Mr. Shahabuddin, learned S.C. VII has submitted that this writ application has become redundant on account of the fact that an agreement which was entered into and subsequently cancelled was valid up to 31.03.2024 and since the said period has lapsed, the grievance of the petitioners cannot be looked into.

¶24

It is a fact that agreement which was entered into between the petitioners and the concerned respondent was valid up to 31.03.2024, but much prior to the said date, the agreement was cancelled by the respondents which is the subject matter of challenge in the present writ application.

¶25

However, considering the fact that the validity of the period of agreement has already come to an end on 31^st March, 2024, we are not inclined to consider the legality or otherwise of the impugned order dated 01.02.2024 passed by respondent No.4. So far as the dues, as claimed by the

¶26

¶27

petitioners, is concerned and the damages on account of premature termination of the contract, the petitioners are at liberty to approach the respondent No.2 by submitting a representation along with all supporting documents thereof within a period of three weeks from today and if such representation is preferred, the respondent No.2 shall consider the same and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, dispose of the representation by speaking and reasoned order within a period of four weeks from the date of submission of the representation. It goes without saying that if the claim of the petitioners is found to be admissible, the necessary payments shall be extended to them within a period of six weeks from the date of disposal of the representation.

¶28

Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. Pending I.As, if any, stand closed.

¶29

( Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)

¶30

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶31

Naquee Ali Khan v. the State of Jharkhand Thro the Secretary Food Public Distribution and Consumer Affairs Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Naquee Ali Khan v. the State of Jharkhand Thro the Secretary Food Public Distribution and Consumer Affairs Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pooja Kumari Alias Jaiswal Vs Amit Kumar

Sunil Kumar Choudhry Vs Pushpalate Devi

Amit Kumar Vs Pooja Kumari Alias Jaiswal

Dulali Saha Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Principal Secretary Department of Rural Development

The State of Jharkhand and Ors. Vs Harinandan Rajak

Bediya Vikash Parishad through Its Chairman Shankar Bediya Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary