SANT RAVIDAS KALYAN SAMITI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.
LAWS(JHAR)-2015-5-138
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on May 13,2015

Sant Ravidas Kalyan Samiti Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Jharkhand And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Aggrieved by order dated 27.4.2015 inviting "Request for Proposal" for economic development and entry point activities, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition. The petitioner pursuant to advertisement issued on 1.3.2009 submitted his proposal and letter dated 30.12.2011 was issued whereunder, the petitioner was appointed as "facilitator" and he was to prepare Detailed Survey Report on the basis of Baseline survey/Data collection/Collation Infrastructure for 10 villages. Thereafter, the Managing Director, Jharkhand State Scheduled Caste Cooperative Development Corporation (JSSCCDC) issued instructions vide letter dated 22.5.2012 to the petitioner regarding Model Gram Yojana. Vide letter dated 28.1.2015, the Deputy Secretary, Welfare Department informed the Managing Director, Jharkhand State Scheduled Caste Cooperative Development Corporation Limited that the petitioner has been appointed as a "facilitator" still, advertisement dated 27.4.2015 has been issued by "JSSCCDC Ltd." inviting "Request for Proposal" for 22 villages.
(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, though vide order dated 30.12.2011 the petitioner was appointed "facilitator" and the work relating to 10 villages was allotted to the petitioner, without terminating the work order and without cancelling the earlier advertisement dated 1.3.2009 the respondent-JSSCCDC Ltd. has issued a fresh advertisement for the same work. It is submitted that, once the work order dated 22.5.2012 has been issued to the petitioner, without indicating any reason and without alleging breach, the impugned advertisement dated 27.4.2015 cannot be issued.
(3.) As against the above, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 vehemently opposes and refers to advertisement dated 27.4.2015 and submits that, the two advertisements are entirely different inasmuch as, the first advertisement was issued with respect to 10 villages and the petitioner has been selected as "facilitator" for the work for preparation of D.P.R. in view of the Detailed Survey Report on the basis of Baseline survey/Data collection/Collation Infrastructure gap whereas, the present advertisement relates to construction of 22 model villages. An entirely different procedure has been adopted in the subsequent advertisement dated 27.4.2015 which is apparent from a bare look at the selection process indicated in the said advertisement itself.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.