IMPORTANT POINT
The timing of the amendment to the MSME certificate in relation to the tender closing date and the authority of the respondents to cancel the LOI based on the amended certificate were central to the court's decision.

JUDGMENT :

1. The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:-

(a) Issue writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned termination orders dated 09.03.2022 (Annex.-15) may kindly be quashed and set-aside.

(b) the respondent Company may kindly be directed to proceed with issuance of fresh LOIs if required and to proceed pursuant to the same permitting the petitioner to go ahead with establishment of bottling plants at Kota and Udaipur.

(c) That all the consequential proceedings, if taken by the respondents during pendency of the writ petition and adverse to the interest of the petitioner, the same may kindly be declared illegal.

(d) Allow the present petition costs.

(e) Allow such further and other reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the Petitioner case may require.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had applied for registration as “Small Enterprise” under Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise (MSME) in the light of the provisions under the MSME Development Act, 2006 and accordingly, the petitioner was issued MSME Certificate on 19.09.2018 with Udhyog Aadhar Memorandum (UAM). A complaint was made by a complainant in respect to the registration of the petitioner unit as “Small Enterprise” whereafter, a site inspection was carried out by the Officers of the District Industries Centre, Surat. The Development Commissioner (MSME) issued a letter dated 03.10.2019 addressed to the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Surat to provide the petitioner an opportunity of hearing in order to amend the business activity in the Memorandum or accordingly, cancel the registration. The petitioner was accordingly granted an opportunity of hearing and thereafter, the petitioner was issued the amended certificate (printed on 08.11.2019) with the same UAM number which was duly deposited by the petitioner to the respondent. The petitioner submitted the bid in pursuance to the tender floated by the respondent-IOCL for the purpose of bottling of the LPG Cylinders at Udaipur and Kota in Rajasthan which were duly accepted by the respondent-IOCL. The petitioner stood qualified as a successful bidder and the LOI was also issued for both the locations. As per Clause 9 of the tender document, exemption is granted from payment of the Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) to the MSME Units and the petitioner was also extended the waiver of Earnest Money Deposit as being a MSME Unit. The petitioner was issued a show cause notice for the termination of Letter of Intent (LOI) on the ground that DIC, Surat has been directed to proceed in respect to amendment or to cancel the MSME certificate issued in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner preferred a writ petition before the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, being aggrieved of the show cause notice dated 22.12.2020 and the Hon’ble Court vide order dated 03.02.2021, restrained the respondents from taking any coercive action against the petitioner.

3. The respondents, on 03.02.2021 i.e. on the same day, terminated the Letter of Intent (LOI) issued in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner again preferred a writ petition while assailing the termination order dated 03.02.2021 before the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur and the Court allowed the writ petition vide order dated 25.01.2022, while directing the respondent-IOCL to consider the petitioner’s amended MSME Certificate in accordance with law. The petitioner submitted the detailed representation before the respondents, however, vide impugned order dated 09.03.2022, the respondents have terminated the Letter of Intent (LOI) issued in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner being aggrieved of the same, has preferred the present writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents have terminated the LOI issued in favour of the petitioner on the basis of surmises and conjectures that th