Writ petition by M/s. Group No.5 Security Service challenging termination of its contract, effected after a fresh notice dated 9th September, 2025 and an order recorded variously as dated 14th October, 2025 (¶5) and 27th October, 2025 (¶¶10, 15), taking effect from 25th November, 2025, with the contract awarded to opposite party No.5 from 26th November, 2025. Background: an earlier termination notice had been quashed in W.P.(C) No.13384 of 2025 (disposed 20th August, 2025) for violating Clause 4.8 of the RFP, which requires thirty days' clear notice and a fifteen-day remedy window, with liberty to proceed afresh. Held: (i) Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 governs computation for institution of court proceedings and cannot be extended to the contractual field; the thirty days must be counted in the ordinary course, rejecting the petitioner's exclusion-of-the-relevant-day plea; (ii) the thirty days' clear notice pertains to the written notice expressing intention of termination and has no nexus to the date the contract takes effect; (iii) on a meaningful reading, Clause 4.8 permits termination after thirty days' clear written notice stating grounds, with a fifteen-day remedy opportunity and a reasonable opportunity to defend/be heard, embedding natural justice; (iv) the sequence of notice dated 9th September, 2025 and termination order dated 27th October, 2025 showed ready compliance with Clause 4.8, warranting no interference; (v) observations were withheld on the pending writ petition challenging opposite party No.5's appointment. Petition dismissed with no order as to costs.
