IMPORTANT POINT
The gravity of the offence and its impact on the organization's operations and reputation are relevant factors in determining the duration of debarment.

JUDGMENT

1. The Petitioner has approached this Court challenging the Show Cause Notice dated 29.09.2021 and the subsequent Debarment Order dated 02.11.2021 passed by the Respondent/NHAI debarring the Petitioner from participating in any ongoing and future bids of Respondent/NHAI for a period of 5 years from the date of issue of the notice.

2. During the pendency of the writ petition, an application being CM APPL. 35854/2023 was filed by the Petitioner for preponing the date of hearing of the writ petition on the ground that almost two years have passed after the Impugned Debarment Order dated 02.11.2021 was issued by the Respondent/NHAI and the writ petition has not been heard. The matter was heard by this Court on 21.11.2023. Two years had lapsed and it was the principal contention of the Petitioner that since two years have lapsed and the Financial Rules prescribes maximum period of debarment for two years, the Impugned Order debarring the Petitioner for a period of five years must be set aside.

3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that a Notice Inviting Bids was issued by the Respondent/NHAI on 19.12.2019 for construction of Foot Over Bridges in Gurgaon-Kotputli-Jaipur section of NH-8 from Km 42.700 to Km 273.000 (approximately 125.600 km) in the State of Haryana and Rajasthan through Engineering, Procurement and Construction mode (hereinafter referred to as "Project"). The Petitioner participated in the bid and was declared as the successful bidder and the project was allotted to the Petitioner on 25.06.2020. A contract was entered into between the Petitioner and the Respondent/NHAI for the said Project on 07.08.2020 and the work commenced from 23.08.2020. Unfortunately, during the execution of the project, one Mr. R. K. Chawla, who was the employee of URS Scott Wilson India Private Limited, consulting contractor of the Respondent/NHAI, was killed outside the office premises of the Respondent/NHAI at Jaipur on 26.08.2021. On 27.08.2021, an FIR was registered at P.S. Vaishali Nagar for the offences under Sections 302 and 34 IPC against one Karandeep Sheoran, Director and other employees of the Petitioner. Resultantly, URS Scott Wilson India Private Limited exited from the contract invoking force majeure i.e., due to the death of their employee R. K. Chawla and for safety and security of its personnel.

4. The Respondent/NHAI, thereafter, received a letter dated 13.09.2021 from the Commissioner of Police stating that an FIR has been registered against Karandeep Sheoran, Director and other employees of the Petitioner for their alleged involvement in the murder of R. K. Chawla. The Respondent/NHAI, thereafter, on 29.09.2021 issued a Show Cause Notice to the Petitioner to show cause as to why the Petitioner should not be debarred from participating in any ongoing projects and future bids of NHAI. The said Show Cause Notice was issued on basis of the incident i.e., murder of R. K. Chawla. Pursuant to the issuance of the Show Cause Notice, the Impugned Debarment Order dated 02.11.2021 was issued by the Respondent/NHAI debarring the Petitioner from participating in any ongoing and future bids of NHAI for a period of 5 years from the date of issuance of the notice.

5. It is stated in the writ petition that the Petitioner has not been given a meaningful opportunity of being heard. It is stated that the Show Cause Notice which relied upon the letter dated 13.09.2021 sent by the Commissioner of Police to the Respondent/NHAI has not been supplied by the Respondent/NHAI to the Petitioner. It is further stated that Clause 27.8 of the contract only states that the Petitioner could have only been debarred for a period of two years in case of fraud and corrupt practices. It is stated that no justification has been given by the Respondent/NHAI in debarring the Petitioner for a period of 5 years. It is stated that there are about 1500 families who would be rendered jobless if the debarment of the Petitioner would continue for 5 years. It is also