JUDGMENT

Shivakant Prasad, J. - This is to consider an application under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

2. Petitioner'S case in brief is that it is engaged in the business of election, testing and commissioning of boilers, ancillaries and associated mechanical practices as a contractor.

3. The respondent is a government of India undertaking and is engaged in the business of engineering and manufacturing for generation of power through varied equipment and system.

4. The respondent Tender being Tender No PSER:SCT:NKP-T1835:17 dated June 8, 2017, inter alia, for shifting The Generator Stators Inside Plant Premises, Handling At site, Storage Yard, Stores, Transportation to site, Erection, Testing, Commissioning and Handling over of Steam Turbine, Turbo Generator, Condenser, Heat Exchanger, Pumps, BFP Drive Turbine etc. The petitioner was selected as the successful bidder and the project was awarded to him. The petitioner had to mobilize at site within 15 days from the date of clearance intimation from the construction manager BHEL/NTPC site. The entire work of their erection, testing, commissioning, PG test, handling over etc under the scope was to be completed within 20 months from the start of erection of the scope of work and other works to be completed within timeline slot provided under the agreement.

5. The petitioner's contention is that petitioner faced many practical difficulties attributable to the acts and omissions of the respondents which delayed mobilization and commitment of the work and due to delay payments causing severe financial crisis to the petitioner and consequential delays.

6. The petitioner's specific case is that the respondent had not provided sufficient frontage for the execution of the work related to SCW piping and it delayed in payment of RA bills and these two issues were the main cause for the delay in the entire project.

7. It is further contended that from March 25, 2020 nationwide lockdown was announced by the Government of India and had to be followed in a strict measure due to the spread of pandemic with Covid19. Due to a strict lockdown of transportation, accessibility to materials, availability of manpower and staff faced at site; all works at site had to be stopped which naturally caused delay in the project for reasons beyond the control of the petitioner.

7. According to the petitioner, the respondent had assured that by deploying sufficient manpower it would be in a position to complete the project as per schedule without counting the time loss due to pandemic and lockdown. In reply on May 11, 2020 the petitioner assured that it is fully capable of completing the work provided fair and supportive environment is given at site. It is alleged that despite receiving the said reply on May 12, 2020, the respondent issued an email informing that the new tender for executing Balance Work Of Erection, Testing & Systems IN 3 x 660 MW NORTH KARANPURA PROJECT has been floated on May 9, 2020 for carrying out balance job against BHEL WO, vide ref. no. PSER: SCT:NKP-T1835:18: PKG-B (LP & FW PIPING): W0: 7140 dated 13.10.20 18 by which the petitioner came to know of the fact that the new tender has been floated by the respondent. It is submitted that there was no necessity and urgency for the respondent to publish the notice inviting the tender especially when the new tender proposes the completion of work within 24 months from the date of the start of work at site, as certified by BHEL Site Construction Manager. It is submitted that such action on the part of respondent has created apprehension in the mind of the petitioner.

8. Hence, the instant application whereunder the petitioner is seeking for an order of injunction restraining the respondent from withdrawing the work allotted to the petitioner and from issuing a new tender in respect of the same work at the risk and cost of the petitioner.

9. Mr. Dhruba Ghosh Learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner submitted that the act