In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the letter no.134 dated 17.01.2012, issued by respondent no.2, whereby Agreement No.20 of 2011 dated 04.05.2011 with regard to the mining of Bishrampur-Mahugain-Tulbula Graphite mines has been terminated with immediate effect and the earnest money deposited by the petitioner was directed to be refunded. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction on the respondent nos. 1 & 2 to expedite the forest clearance/permission of Stage I & II and to complete other required legal formalities, so that the petitioner may be able to start mining work in accordance with the terms of the Agreement no.20 of 2011.

2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation Limited(JSMDC for short) invited tender from reputed concern for hiring of equipment for mining of minimum 2000 tonnes of Graphite lumps per month from its Mahugain-Tulbula lease hold area and purchasing the same. The petitioner, who is well established in the field of mining, beneficiation and marketing of Graphite, submitted tender with all the relevant documents. Respondent no.3 was also one of the participants in the tender process. After scrutiny, the petitioner was declared successful and was allotted the work. The petitioner was then asked to enter into an agreement. Accordingly, Agreement dated 04.05.2011 was executed in between the petitioner and the Managing Director of respondent-JSMDC.

3. Clause-14(1) of the Agreement provided that the work of mining is to be started within 30 days from issuance of work order or singing of the agreement after forest clearance of Stage I & II from the Forest Department, whichever is later. The forest clearance was to be obtained by the respondents. In the said clause, it was clearly provided that Gestation period would start after 30 days of commencement of work.

4. According to the petitioner, forest clearance of Stage I & II from the Forest Department was not obtained by the respondents. Since there was clear condition for commencement of work after forest clearance of Stage I & II by the Forest Department, the petitioner could not commence the work and waited for the certificate of the forest clearance. Instead of obtaining forest clearance and allowing the petitioner to commence the work, the respondent-JSMDC arbitrarily terminated the petitioner's agreement no.20 of 2011 dated 04.05.2011 and communicated the same to the petitioner by letter no.134 dated 17.01.2012 signed by the General Manager(Mines).

5. It has been submitted that the petitioner's agreement has been terminated falsely alleging that the petitioner has failed to discharge the obligation and responsibilities, as envisaged in the NIT and Clause-4 of the Agreement no.20 of 2011 dated 04.05.2011 and violated the term of the letter issued by the respondent-JSMDC. All the letters relating to commencement of the work without obtaining forest clearance of Stage I & II were frivolous and unfounded and the termination is malicious and illegal and the same are liable to be quashed. The malafide is apparent from the fact that immediately after termination of the petitioner's agreement, the work has been allotted to respondent no.3, who was L-II and whose earnest money was already refunded. Agreement has been also signed even without obtaining forest clearance, which is one of the conditions for commencement of work. The said respondent no.3 has been allowed to commence the work even without taking forest and environment clearance.

6. The petitioner has also prayed for cancellation of agreement with respondent no.3.

7. The petition has been contested by respondent no.1-JSMDC as well as respondent no.3 in whose favour work has been allotted after termination of the petitioner's agreement.

8. Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of JSMDC, opposed the petitioner's prayer on the ground that there is alternative remedy of filing appeal against the order and in view thereof,