Compliance with the Purchase Manual and the requirement for the petitioner to provide convincing evidence to challenge the inspection report.

JUDGMENT

Parth Prateem Sahu, J. - This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the order dated 09-01-2020 issued by the 1st respondent for banning the business dealing with the petitioner for a period of 3 years in terms of Clause 4.7.7 of Purchase Manual of Coal India Limited.

2. Facts of the case in brief are that, the petitioner who has been shown as a sole proprietorship firm engaged in manufacturing multiple products including Tensile Plastic and LED Lights etc. and registered with National Small Industries Corporation Limited (for short " NSIC"). Respondent 1 floated a Notification Inviting Tender (NIT) No. SECL/BSP/MMW/APS/ SnR/TPN/ 05 dated 26-05-2018 for purchase of Tensile Plastic Net. In the aforementioned Tender proceedings, the petitioner also participated but the said Tender was called off by the 1st respondent. The petitioner received an e-mail on 30-08-2018 consisting that the st respondent is sending 3 officials for inspecting the manufacturing unit of Tensile Plastic. The officials of 1st respondent on the scheduled date inspected the factory of which address has been shown in the tender document submitted by the petitioner''s proprietor and found that the petitioner''s proprietor was not having the manufacturing unit of Tensile Plastic, thereafter, show-cause notice was issued to him on 10-05-2019, asking him to explain as to why he should not be banned for wilful suppression of facts and furnishing wrong information for unlawful gains including suspension of entire business dealings and subsisting the present contracts/supplies for a period of 6 (six) months. Reply was submitted by the petitioner''s proprietor on 22-05-2019, answering that on the date of visit of the officials of 1st respondent for manufacturing unit of Tensile Plastic, he was not available, he was out of the country, the petitioner is duly certified by NSIC as a manufacturer of Tensile Plastic and other products. The RespondentSECL floated new tender notification on 03-12-2019 through which bids were called for "LED Portable Miner''s Cap Lamp (LED Lamp)". The petitioner again participated in the said tender proceedings in which the petitioner was disqualified, against which the petitioner made representation to Chairman-cumManaging Director of Respondent-SECL. Respondent 1, instead of replying to the representation made by the petitioner, issued an order/ letter banning the petitioner for a period of 3 years; the action taken by the 1st respondent is under challenge stating it to be arbitrary and in-violation of principle of natural justice.

3. The 1st respondent submitted reply to the writ petition and pleaded that the showcause notice dated 22-05-2019 wherein the business dealings with the petitioner were suspended including the existing contract too; but said notice was not put to challenge by the petitioner till the expiry of period mentioned in the notice. The conduct of the petitioner in not challenging the show-cause notice wherein the explanation was sought as to why the petitioner should not be banned for willful suppression of facts including suspension of all the business dealings with the petitioner as well as subsisting contract/ supply order for a period of 6 months shows that the petitioner has accepted the action taken against him on the complaint received by the 1st respondent. To verify the veracity of complaint, a Committee of 3 officials was constituted for inspecting the factory premises of petitioner, which inspected the factory premises on 30-08-2018, upon which, it was found that the tendered item (Tensile Plastic) was not manufactured on the address supplied.

4. On the basis of the report submitted by the inspection committee, clarifications were sought for by the 1st respondent from the petitioner''s proprietor. After considering the reply/ defence submitted and taking approval from the competent authority for banning business with the petitioner, order Annexure P-1 dated