- (1.) The controversy which gives rise to the present appeal is an order dated 10.02.2016 issued by the Senior Deputy Manager (SH & CH), Kolkata Port Trust (hereinafter referred to as "KoPT"). The gist of the order is terminating the contract in favour of the appellant that was executed by and between the writ petitioner and the KoPT on the alleged ground of failure on the part of the appellant to commence shore handling operation at Berth Nos.2 and 8 of Haldia Dock Complex in spite of repeated reminders and opportunities.
(2.) Learned Judge referred to relevant material for the purpose of placing on record the dispute between the parties and also referred to Clause 7 and Clause 9 which were relied upon by the parties and ultimately opined that the writ petition cannot be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India since there has to be factual investigation with reference to the terms of contract and also conduct of the parties. Accordingly he dismissed the writ petition. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed.
(3.) Mr. Hirak Kumar Mitra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant, brought to our notice the earlier litigation with regard to the tender of the very same two berths and also the fact that the present appellant/writ petitioner was the successful tenderer who got the tender and consequently a contract came to be executed by and between the parties. He also tried to impress upon us right from the beginning that there was step-motherly treatment towards this appellant/writ petitioner at the hands of KoPT. Therefore, they were finding one reason or the other to terminate the contract at the drop of a hat. In spite of several opportunities being given to the appellant extending time limit as indicated at Clause 7.3, overnight the contract was terminated after fixing the last date of compliance as 10.02.2016 and KoPT proceeded to issue another tender invitation on 11.02.2016.;