When a penalty period is nearly expired, the court may dispose of the petition without deciding on merits to avoid academic adjudication, while ensuring future rights to participate in tenders are protected.

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

1. Heard Mr. Anshul Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Panakj Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 11.03.2025 (Annexure P/1), issued by the respondent No. 3, by which the petitioner has been debarred for a period of one year from participating in future tenders of the respondents-South Eastern Coalfield Limited (for short, the SECL).

3. The facts, as projected by the petitioner is that the petitioner service provider who provides transportation-based services along with man power on contract or agreement basis. The petitioner is working with respondent SECL since 2004 and is having experience of more than 20 years. The respondent-SECL through its Material Management Department has floated a bid through GeM portal on dated 12.03.2024 for custom bid for services, hiring of 2 nos. 22-24 seats capacity shift bus for 24 hours on rental basis with 3 drivers for 36 months or 1095 days for movement of workers and employees of Gerva mines.

4. According to the petitioner, he fulfilled the eligibility criteria of the bid document therefore he participated in the said bid and ultimately the award of contract was issued in favor of the petitioner on 22.06.2024. Vide letter dated 22.06.2024, letter reference no. SECL/GA/SO(E&M)24-25/550 issued by Staff Officer, Gevra Area, SECL, the petitioner was directed to deposit performance security of Rs.4,42,224/- within 21 days from the issuance of GeM contract i.e. on or before 13.07.2024. Again on dated 04.07.2024 through a reminder letter, the petitioner was directed to deposit performance security within 21 days from the issuance of GeM contract i.e. on or before 13.07.2024.

5. Mr. Anshul Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner vide letter dated 08.07.2024 informed the respondent authority that due to his bad medical conditions it was impossible for him to execute the contract and it has also been informed that he has also suffered paralysis attack on dated 20.06.2024 due to which the doctor has suggested the petitioner to take a rest till his complete recovery and further it was prayed by the petitioner to the respondent authority to cancel the award of contract. However, without considering the letter of petitioner the respondent authority on dated 09.07.2024 again sent a reminder letter to the petitioner to deposit performance security amount before 13.07.2024. The show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on dated 27.08.2024 by the General Manager/Staff Officer (E&M) SECL Gevra Area whereby the petitioner has been requested to explain his stand within 21 days from the date of issuance of show cause notice as to why penal action of debarring the petitioner firm for 2 years should not be taken. The Staff Officer (E&M) SECL Gevra Area on 23.12.2024 has passed an impugned order whereby it has been stated that while considering the letter dated 08.07.2024 made by the petitioner and after scrutinizing medical prescription provided by the petitioner the respondent authority has reached to a conclusion that as per the medical prescriptions the Doctor has neither explicitly written to take rest and nor has been refrained from going outside from work and further the said act of the petitioner violates Clause No. 4 of the General terms and Conditions and Annexure-I of General Terms and Conditions (Guidelines for Banning of Business) and therefore the petitioner firm has been de