Equitable remedies, such as interim injunctions, are discretionary and will be denied when a petitioner suppresses material facts about prior legal disputes, demonstrates unreasonable delay (laches), or fails to approach the court with clean hands.

ORDER (ORAL) :

1. I.A. No.01 of 2025 has been filed in the instant Writ Petition. The I.A. is an application seeking interim stay of Request for Proposal (RFP) dated 19-09-2025, inviting application/proposal for development of Ting Ting hydroelectric project on river, Rathong Chu on „as is where is‟ basis by Respondent No.1.

2. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submits that, the project for which the RFP was issued on 19-09-2025, was initially conceived by the Petitioner in the year 2008 and the project was to have been set up by the Petitioner. After all essential steps were taken by the Petitioner for initiating the project and the Agreement settled on 03-09-2008, the Respondent No.1 vide a letter dated 10-02-2012, addressed to the Petitioner enclosed the Notification issued by Respondent No.2 being Notification bearing No.12/HOME/2012, dated 08-02-2012, suddenly ordering closure of the project “in public interest” with immediate effect. After such closure, although several requests were made to the Government by the Petitioner to revive the project no heed was paid. The communication of 10-02-2012, it is urged, did not have a legal basis for the reason that, the contract between the Petitioner and the Respondent No.1 specified that it could be terminated only on three grounds viz.,;

“Article 5 TERMINATION AND TAKING OVER OF THE PROJECT

5.1. In the event it is eventually confirmed as impossible or impractical to start the construction of the Project within six months from the date of obtaining all the clearances, for reasons exclusively attributable to the Company, the Government reserves the right to terminate the Agreement.

5.2. In the event of stoppage of construction on the main Project components by the Company, for a period of more than twelve months for reasons not covered under Force Majeure and for reasons attributable to the Company and/or abandonment of the Project by the Company, the Government shall, after giving due opportunity to the Company to rectify the same, have the right to terminate this Agreement. In the event of termination of this Agreement under this clause, the Government shall have the option to take over the Project after assuming all the Debt servicing obligations of the Company, to the extent drawn for the Project, as on the date of termination. Notwithstanding any investment by the Government under this Clause, the Company shall be liable to pay all the due owed to the Government by the Company pursuant to this Agreement.

5.3. After the expiry of the Agreement Period referred to in Clause 2.2, the Project including its all assets and works shall be transferred to the Government free of cost and in good operating conditions.”

(i) That, the Respondent No.2 did not put forth any of the grounds in the said correspondence for terminating the contract but merely ordered the closure of the project “in public interest”. That, in the months of March and June, 2025, the Petitioner had issued letters to the authorities of the Government for revival of the project, however no steps towards this end were taken. To the surprise of the Petitioner the RFP was again issued on 19-09-2025 with last date for submission of bid fixed on 18-11-2025, on which dates the bids will also be opened. That, in the circumstances a major part of the project having been initiated by the Petitioner, the project ought to have been revived and allowed to be taken over by the Petitioner, instead of issuance of a fresh RFP. Hence, the prayer for stay of the RFP.

3. Resisting the arguments adv