Court No. - 1
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 38165 of 2019 Petitioner :- M/S India Supply Corporation And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailesh Upadhyay,Rakesh Pande (Senior Adv.) Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Abhishek Srivastava,Kapil Dev Singh Rathore,Mahboob Ahmad
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard Shri Rakesh Pandey, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Shailesh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2, Shri Mehboob Ahmad, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 3, 4, 6 and 7 and Shri Kapil Dev Singh Rathore, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 5.
Entertaining this writ petition on the question as to whether the holding company could have directed the licensee to take an action against the petitioners, who have entered into an agreement with the licensee to rescind the contract, was within its authority or not, we directed learned counsel for the respondents by our order dated 22.11.2019 to have instructions in the matter.
Today, Shri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2, has prayed for further time in the matter.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation, Shri Mehboob Ahmad, however, could not dispute that there has been non-compliance of principles of natural justice before rescinding the contract and therefore, we are not satisfied with the instructions placed before us and we need a detailed counter affidavit at his end as well.
From the perusal of the records and as the terms of agreement entered between the licensee and the petitioner, we find that the contract was entered into on 26.06.2019 for a period of six months, which is going to expire in December this year and the petitioner contends that he has already carried out 90 per cent of the work and in the remaining time, he can complete the work. However, because of the orders impugned, which have resulted into rescinding the contract and floating of new tender, his rights and interests under the agreement have been prejudiced.
Besides above, the argument is that the holding company does not enjoy any authority in law to direct the licensee to terminate the contract in an ex parte manner.
The arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, prima facie appear to have some substance and the matter requires consideration.
Let all the respondents file their counter affidavit within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.
List immediately after the expiration of the aforesaid period.
In the meanwhile, until further orders of this Court, the effect and operation of the orders dated 05.09.2019 (Annexure 3) and 06.11.2019 (Annexure 5) to the writ petition shall remain in abeyance.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 I. Batabyal (Ajit Kumar, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)