Rajesh Shankar, J. - (1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order contained in Letter No. 776.CE(T)/JUSNL dated 10.08.2016 issued under the signature of the respondent no. 2 whereby the said authority has debarred the petitioner from participating in future tender to be floated by the respondent no. 1.
(2.) The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to NIT No. 121/PR/JUSNL/2015-16, the petitioner was awarded the work of Design, Engineering, Supply, Erection, Testing and Commissioning of 220/132/33kV (2x150+2x50) MVA Grid Sub-Station (in short 'GSS') at Jaina More, Bokaro. The site was not free from encumbrances. There were 140 trees and bushes, 12 electrical distribution feeder line poles, 3 hand pumps, 2 water wells as also 11 offices/residential quarters and abandoned civil storage structures. The petitioner vide letter dated 11.04.2016 requested for providing the site free from all encumbrances, however the respondent no. 2 did not take care to remove the obstructions in execution of the work which caused delay in completion of the work. However, the respondent no. 2 vide impugned order dated 10.08.2016 debarred the petitioner from participating in future tenders. The petitioner has challenged the order of debarment on the ground that there is no specific guideline laid down in the general terms and conditions of the contract for debarring the petitioner from participating in the future tenders. It is further submitted that the delay in execution of work occasioned only due to the fault of the respondents in handing over the site free from all encumbrances. It is also submitted that no show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner for the proposed action of debarment. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner puts reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Gorkha Security Services v. Government (NCT of Delhi) and others reported in (2014) 9 SCC 105 and Kulja Industries Limited v. Chief General Manager, Western Telecom Project, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and others reported in (2014) 14 SCC 731.
(3.) Per contra, the learned Senior Counsel for the respondent-JUSNL submits that in spite of repeated notices to the petitioner, it delayed the completion of work. A committee was constituted to assess the slow progress of work vide office order no. 1280 dated 18.07.2016 and the committee submitted the report on 08.08.2016 stating that the cause of delay is due to poor planning of the entire work by the petitioner, lack of adequate experience in handling such project and lack of positive approach by the petitioner to handle such turn-key project. It was further reported that the hurdle of cutting of trees and demolishing of residential buildings had affected the civil work in 220 KV S/Y but not in 33 KV and 132 KV S/Y area and thus the same did not hamper the overall progress of the work, rather only some parts of the total work.;