The judgment establishes the principle that transparency in the selection process, adherence to natural justice, and respect for fundamental rights are essential in contractual engagements with public authorities.

JUDGMENT

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J. - The petitioner is an enlisted contractor under the West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company (WBSEDCL) for certain allotted categories and was engaged in several projects undertaken by the WBSEDCL.

2. It is alleged by the petitioner that the WBSEDCL, vide its Office Order No.1171 dated February 7, 2017, specifically decided that when there is dearth of suitable contractors or agencies, such kind of jobs may be awarded to agencies and/or contractors having provisional enlistment, after verifying their credentials and performances, in consultation with authorities of a rank not below that of additional Chief Engineer and Zonal Manager. a copy of the said Officer Order is annexed as annexure P-5 to the writ petition.

3. The petitioner, in the capacity of a small scale contractor and general order supplier of materials of equipment and also an enlisted contractor under the Distribution Wing of the WBSEDCL, having Renewal Enlistment No.:- Distribution Enlistment - R/2018-19/149, was not only provisionally enlisted as a contractor of the WBSEDCL long back but was also subsequently extended in such capacity for the years 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19. The copies of the relevant licences, Renewal of Enlistment and other related documents are annexed collectively as annexure P-1 to the writ petition.

4. The Divisional Manager, Bishnupur (O & M) Division of the WBSEDCL decided to deploy an enlisted agency and/or contractor for R & M Work of 33 KV and 11 KV HTOH lines emanating from Ramsagar 33/11 KV Substation.

5. The petitioner contends that, time and again, the petitioner wrote to the respondent-authorities requesting the petitioner's selection for such work. However, the respondents took no initiative in that regard till the date of allotment of such work. Copies of such representations are also annexed and collectively marked as annexure P-6 to the writ petition.

6. Subsequently, the petitioner learnt that the Divisional Manager, Bishnupur Division (respondent no.3 herein), by his impugned Memo No. BSPD/2RSO/1231 dated October 3, 2019, issued Work Order in favour of respondent no.6 (M/s. Ghosh Construction) in connection with the said R & M work at Ramsagar and had directed respondent no.6 to commence maintenance work immediately after causing necessary inspection. Such Work Order is annexed as annexure P-7 to the writ petition.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Work Order itself reveals that respondent no.6 was selected pursuant to prayers made on his behalf vide Receipt No.6995 dated January 9, 2019 and Receipt No.2072 dated July 3, 2019, vide approval No.533 dated July 16, 2019. No tender process was initiated for such selection.

8. In terms of credentials and performance, the petitioner contends to be far more eligible for the work-in-question than respondent no.6. The petitioner was also engaged as a sub-contractor of a turn-key agency, which constructed the said Ramsagar 33 KV line and 11 KV line and associate works of line as well as for Ramsagar 33/11 KV Substation Switchyard Electrical Works and had specific practical knowledge about the said substation, which has to be maintained as per the Work Order.

9. The present writ petition has been preferred, challenging the Memo No. BSPD/2RSO/1231 dated October 3, 2019 issued by respondent no.3 engaging respondent no.6 and seeking ancillary reliefs.

10. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vociferously contends that false allegations have been made against the petitioner in the affidavit-in-opposition filed respectively by respondent nos. 1 to 5 and respondent no.6 in the writ petition. Learned counsel points out that, in paragraph no.4 of the affidavit-in-opposition used by respondent no.6, it has been stated that the respondent-authorities duly rejected the petitioner's application on the ground that the writ petitioner is a miscreant involved in illegal activity at Ramsagar Substation and that the writ