Velocis Systems Pvt. Ltd. Vs Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd.

Prayer in this writ petition is for setting aside notice dated 04.07.2025 (Annexure P1) issued by Chief Engineer, Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited, Panchkula for termination of the contract as detailed therein and expulsion of petitioner from the site besides blacklisting of the petitioner.

¶14

Learned counsel for petitioner explains that two contracts had been entered into between the parties, first pertaining to supply of communication equipment within India and abroad while second contract was in regard to services which included installation of supplied items and other services, training and maintenance (AMC). Certain disputes arose between parties regarding work carried out by petitioner specifically in respect to time frame for RITU SHARMA 2025.07.24 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

2

¶16

CWP-20645-2025

¶17

completion and amount of money released by respondent. An Arbitrator was appointed vide order dated 16.12.2022 in ARB-54-2021 by this Court. Award dated 27.12.2024 was passed by learned Arbitrator while adjudicating upon disputes concerning all matters except maintenance of equipment under second contract dated 23.06.2014. In respect to further dispute which arose, learned Arbitrator (former Judge of this High Court) was again appointed by this High Court in ARB-97-2025. It is further submitted that all the issues as raised in impugned notice are either subject matter of the concluded arbitration or of the ongoing arbitration between the parties. There is not even a mention about arbitration proceedings in the impugned notice dated 04.07.2025. It is, thus, prayed that impugned notice dated 04.07.2025 be set aside and writ petition be allowed as prayed for.

¶18

Learned counsel for State refutes the arguments while submitting that present writ petition is premature as petitioner has rushed to this Court without even filing the reply.

¶19

Various arguments have been raised by learned counsel for petitioner to submit that show cause notice itself is uncalled for and should be withdrawn. It is submitted that period of contract(s) has expired.

¶20

Having heard learned counsel for parties, we do not find any ground to cause interference at this nascent stage. It is open to the petitioner to file comprehensive reply to show cause notice dated 04.07.2025 and agitate the matter before the authorities itself by taking all available pleas. At this stage, it is pointed out by learned counsel for petitioners that period of fifteen (15) days afforded as per show cause notice dated 04.07.2025 has since been elapsed. Show cause notice was received on 10.07.2025 by petitioner, therefore, reply if filed now, may not be accepted.

¶21

RITU SHARMA 2025.07.24 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶22

3

¶23

CWP-20645-2025

¶24

In the given facts and circumstances, it is directed that in case, reply to show cause notice dated 04.07.2025 is filed by petitioner within next three days, same be considered by respondents and matter be decided in accordance with law after considering the reply and affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, by way of a speaking order.

¶25