Back
NEERAJ P. DHOTE, R. G. AVACHAT
EBIX Cash Pvt. Ltd – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra, Through Chief Secretary, Govt of Maharashtra – Respondent
ORDER :
(Neeraj P. Dhote, J.)
The Petitioner, a Private Limited Company, has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, taking exception to the termination notice dated 13.06.2024 by which the Contract for E-ticketing system for the city buses plied in Aurangabad city allotted to the Petitioner Company is terminated.
2. It is submitted by learned Advocate for the Petitioner that the Petitioner was awarded the contract for the aforesaid purpose on 18.02.2020, pursuant to tender process of 2019. The Petitioner implemented the contract as per the tender document and ‘Go Live Certificate’ was issued by the Respondent No.2 – Aurangabad Smart City Development Corporation Limited (ASCDCL) on 01.11.2021. The Petitioner was implementing the contract successfully for over a period of four (4) years. ASCDCL issued a new tender on 05.02.2024 for procurement of Electronic Ticket Issuing Machines (ETIM). On 08.02.2024 the Petitioner Company objected for allotment of the scope of the work relating to ETIM, as the same was colliding with the scope of work covered by the Petitioner’s contract.
3. It is further submitted that the scope of work in the tender
Writ petitions in contractual disputes are generally not maintainable if they involve disputed questions of fact.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in contractual matters, the court may not entertain a writ petition if there is a public law element, and the parties should resort to the con....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of abiding by the dispute resolution mechanism provided in the Agreement for resolving disputes arising from the contract. The Court....
The court emphasized the importance of adhering to contractual procedures and the validity of penalties for non-performance, reinforcing the authority's right to terminate contracts under specified c....
Judicial review in government contracts is limited, ensuring non-arbitrariness, and contract termination on grounds of corruption can occur without pre-notice when grounded in statutory provisions.
The court reinforced that the existence of an arbitration clause limits the scope for judicial intervention in contractual disputes involving the state.
Public authorities must act fairly and cannot arbitrarily terminate contracts without justification, reinforcing the legitimacy of expectations within public-private partnerships.
Disputes arising from contract termination must be resolved through arbitration, not writ jurisdiction, especially when complicated questions of fact are present.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
