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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 14546

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


2026:CGHC:19264-DB


WPC No. 2004 of 2026


M/s Harsh Roadlines Private Limited Through Proprietor - Shakil Ahmed, S/o - Abdul Rajak, Aged About 45 Years, Office At - Shop No. 01, Nawagarh, Mahamaya Mandir Road, Ambikapur, Sarguja, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh

... Petitioner

versus

1 - South Eastern Coal Fields Limited Through Managing Director, Office At - Seepat Road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

2 - General Manager Contract Management Cell, S.E.C.L., Seepat Road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

3 - General Manager, Finance, S.E.C.L., Seepat Road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

4 - General Manager Production, S.E.C.L., Seepat Road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

... Respondents


For Petitioner : Mr. Gyan Prakash Shukla, Advocate

For Respondents/SECL : Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate.


Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge


27-04-2026

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

----- --

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DMAAiOg DiHt Ia LAl MKy HMsi AgENnDed by

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D17a:t2e0: :24072 +6.00543.209

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

1. Heard Mr. Gyan Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, learned counsel, appearing for Respondents/SECL.

2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief(s):-

“10.1. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly call for records pertaining to case of the petitioner.

10.2. That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside and quash the impugned order dated 10/12/2025 issued by the respondent authorities, in the interest of justice.

10.3. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner firm to participate in future tender's.

10.4. That, any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deemed just and fit in facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. The facts of the case in brief are that, the Respondent authorities floated an e-tender notice on 12-12-2024, for the following works (A) Hiring of tippers for transportation of coal from surface bunker/coal stock yard of NCPH R-6 Mine to NCPH siding via Tina Dafai, for a quantity of 33,07,500 Te @1294 TPD for a period of 2557 days of NCPH R-6 Mine, Chirimiri Area, (B) Hiring of tippers for transportation of coal from surface bunker to coal stock yard of NCPH R-6 Mine for a Quantity of 1,57,500 Te for a period of 2557 days on as and when required basis of NCPH R-6 Mine, Chirimiri Area, (C) Hiring of payloader for mechanical loading of stacked coal into tippers from coal stock yard of NCPH R-6 Mine for the quantity of 1,57,500Te at NCPH R- 6 Mine for a period of 2557 days on as and when required basis of NCPH R-6 Mine, Chirimiri Area. The Petitioner participated in the bid procedure. On 24-03-2025 the Petitioner preferred an e-mail stating that due to an inadvertent error, Petitioner firm mistakenly entered the reverse value in the column for the “Accepted percentage of base value” instead of entering 85.01% as per Petitioner calculation, the Petitioner typed 14.99. After opening of price bid in GeM portal, the Petitioner emerged as L-1. The Petitioner quoted his bid Rs.1,05,61,871.85 (inclusive of GST @ 18%) against Rs.7,04,59,452.00 (inclusive of GST @ 18%), which is 85.10% below the estimated Cost. It has been contended by the Petitioner that the email dated 24-03-2025 was preferred when the bid was not opened by the tender committee and the Petitioner tried to correct their inadvertent mistake. The Petitioner also preferred a letter dated 13-04-2025 to the General Manager (CMC), SECL, Bilaspur (C.G.), but no heed was paid. On 06-08-2025 the General Manager (CMC)/HOD, SECL, Bilaspur, issued a show cause notice to the Petitioner against proposed penalty of debarment with respect to G.E.M. - 144. Thereafter, the Petitioner filed their response to the show cause notice and again same explanation was shown in the reply. Thereafter, on 10-12-2025 the impugned order was passed by the General Manager, SECL debarring the Petitioner from from participating in future tenders of SECL for a period of one year, against which the Petitioner filed WPC No.1201/2026 which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 19-03-2026 with liberty to file a duly constituted petition. Thereafter, the present petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 10-12-2025.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 10-12-2025 is arbitrary, unreasonable, and contrary to the facts on record, as it fails to consider that the alleged discrepancy arose purely from a bona fide clerical error while submitting

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