SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Jhk) 572

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RAJESH SHANKAR, J.
M.K. Enterprises, Hazaribagh, represented through its proprietor Md. Kalam – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
W.P.(C) No. 1640 of 2020
Decided on : 22-12-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, Adv

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 420 - Supply of food supplements to various Anganbari centres – Tender – Offence of Cheating – Misappropriation of government funds by petitioner – Order of blacklisting – Quash of - Allegations against the petitioner is that it received excess payment by submitting false bills and after issuance of show cause notice, it deposited the differential amount and thus accepted the allegations levelled against it - Petitioner has not controverted said fact, rather has tried to explain that there could be miscalculation in TDS or any other reason for committing the said mistake - Held, It is well settled that State or its instrumentality is free to decide not to deal with certain persons or class of persons on account of undesirability of entering into contractual relationship with such persons by passing order of blacklisting. There need not be any statutory grant of such power. The only legal limitation upon exercise of such power is that State has to act fairly and rationally and for some legitimate purpose - Before issuance of impugned order, petitioner was served show cause notice clearly mentioning that it violated terms and conditions of tender by supplying ‘Chyavanprash’ of ‘New Shama Chyavanprash Special’ brand instead of supplying ‘Chyavanprash’ of premium brands mentioned in tender document, court do not see any procedural impropriety in issuance of order whereby the petitioner has been blacklisted – Court view that impugned order of blacklisting has been passed in due compliance of principles of natural justice and, therefore, there is no ground to interfere with merit of same under writ jurisdiction. It, however, appears that petitioner has been blacklisted for a period of three years whereas in show cause notice, proposed punishment of blacklisting was for one year and respondents have failed to explain as to why they exceeded period of blacklisting than what was proposed - Period of blacklisting already suffered by it will be sufficient in the facts and circumstances of the present case - Petition disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

The present cases is taken up through video conferencing.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order of District Mineral Foundation Trust (DMFT), Hazaribag as contained in memo no. 30/DMFT dated 08.06.2020 issued under the signatures of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 being Chairman and Secretary respectively of the said DMFT whereby the following decisions have been taken:-

(i) to lodge an F.I.R under section 420 of the IPC alleging misappropriation of the government funds by the petitioner,

(ii) supply order earlier issued to the petitioner has been cancelled with immediate effect and the balance amount of the petitioner has been forfeited on the ground of violation of the terms and conditions of the tender,

(iii) the petitioner has been blacklisted for a period of three years in the light of allegation with respect to embezzlement of government funds.

3. Factual background of the case as stated in the writ petition is that a very short term tender notice was issued by the Deputy Development Commissioner, Hazaribagh (the respondent no. 3) vide Notice Inviting Tender No. 01/DMFT/2019 dated 26.02.2019 for supply of food supplements to various Anganbari centres (330 Anganbari centres) in Dadi, Keredari and Barkagaon blocks of Hazaribagh District. The petitioner applied and was awarded the said work vide memo no. 20/DMFT dated 08.03.2019 issued by the respondent no. 3. The petitioner supplied the materials i.e ‘Chikki/Gud Patti’, ‘Chyavanprash’ and ‘Tetra Pack Amul Taaza Milk’ from April 2019 to July 2019 to the Anganbari centres of aforesaid three blocks and payment for the months from April 2019 to June 2019 was also made to the petitioner, however the bill for the month of July, 2019 was not paid. Thereafter, the petitioner could not supply the materials to the Anganbari centres of the said Blocks due to strike of Anganbari Sevikas. The supply was again made by the petitioner from the month of October, 2019 till December, 2019. Since the petitioner could not get the sufficient quantity of ‘Patanjali Chyavanprash’ in the month of December, 2019, it supplied some quantity of ‘Chyavanprash’ of different brand namely, ‘New Shama Chyavanprash Special’ to the said Anganbari centres. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted bills for the month of July, October, November and December, 2019 to the respondent no.3 and the total cost of the materials supplied for the said months was worth Rs. 76 Lakhs (approx.). However, the petitioner was not paid a single penny due to which it was not in a position to supply the materials from the month of January, 2020. The respondent no.3, vide memo no. 584/585 dated 20.05.2020 issued a show cause notice to the petitioner alleging that the supply of ‘Chyavanprash’ was not made to the Anganbari centres of three blocks of district- Hazaribagh as per the brand mentioned in the tender, rather a new brand of ‘Chyavanprash’ namely ‘New Shama Chyavanprash Special’ was supplied in the month of December, 2019 without taking permission from the competent authority. The petitioner replied the said show cause notice on 22.05.2020 stating that due to the pressure of Sevikas and the supervisors of the concerned Anganbari centres as well as due to scarcity of ‘Chyavanprash’ of ‘Patanjali’ brand in the market on account of model code of conduct having been imposed during Legislative Assembly election in the State of Jharkhand, the petitioner had no other option but to supply ‘Chyavanprash’ of different brand namely ‘New Shama Chyavanprash Special’ which is a 30 years old brand and of a reputed company. However, the petitioner was again issued show cause notice by the respondent no.3 vide memo no. 27/DMFT dated 27.05.2020 wherein it was alleged that the petitioner stopped supplying the materials from the month of January, 2020 without any information to the concerned authority. The petitioner replied the said show cause notice on 29.05.2020 stating that since payment of huge amount of Rs. 76 La

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top