1. Heard Mr. Sourabh Dangi and Ms. Surya Kawalkar Dangi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Ramakant Mishra, learned Deputy Solicitor General, appearing for respondent Nos.1 & 6, Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. Rohishek Verma, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No.2 and Mr. R. K. Gupta, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No.5.
2. An agreement dated 22.01.2019 was executed between the petitioner and the respondent No.3, i.e. National Projects Construction Corporation Limited (NPCC) for construction of various building structures and external development at Guru Ghasidas Vishwavidyalaya, Bilaspur. Tender was called for on behalf of respondent No.2, i.e., Guru Ghasidas Vishwavidyalaya by respondent No.3 and the petitioner had emerged as the successful tenderer.
3. On 12.11.2022, the respondent No.3 issued a termination notice in connection with the aforesaid work requiring the petitioner to show cause within a period of two days as to why action to terminate the contract be not initiated against the petitioner keeping in view the non-performance and failure to stand by their own commitment.
4. In the said notice, amongst others, it is stated that stipulated date of completion of the work, as per the work order, was 05.04.2020 and that even after lapse of more than 2.5 years, the work had not been completed. It is also reflected therein that pursuant to a meeting chaired by the Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources, on 01.09.2022, consent was given to complete all the internal works of all the buildings by 30.09.2022 and the external works by 31.10.2022, but, several works are pending completion for its full functionality. The works that are pending completion are also indicated in the said notice. Perusal of the said notice would also go to show that despite the performance guarantee having expired on 15.04.2022, the petitioner had not renewed the performance guarantee in terms of Clause 9.0 of the General Conditions of Contract.
5. The petitioner submitted its reply on 16.08.2022.
6. We are given to understand that till now, no decision has been conveyed to the petitioner in respect of the show-cause notice issued.
7. The present writ petition is filed with the following prayers:
“I. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the termination notice dated 12.11.2022 (Annexure P/1) issued by respondent No.4.
II. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 and 4 to carry on the analysis by way of site measurement for the works executed by the petitioner, so that the petitioner's bills can be finalized.
III. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent NPCC and respondent GGV to settle the claim of the petitioner, at the earliest, within a period of 45 days.
IV. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems, fit in the facts and circumstances may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.”
8. Ms. Dangi submits that that the petitioner had completed the work and has drawn our attention to a letter dated 16.08.2022 issued by the Zonal Manager of NPCC to contend that almost entire work was completed as per the approved drawing and scope of the work. It is on the basis of the aforesaid letter dated 16.08.2022, contention is sought to be advanced that for illegal gain and wrongful bargain and in order to deprive the petitioner of its legitimate dues, the impugned show-cause notice has been issued. Ms. Dangi has also drawn our attention to Annexure-P/12, which is a status report of construction work at Guru Ghasidas Vishwavidyalaya, Bilaspur as on 23.12.2022.
9. On a specific query of the Court as to whether any meeting was held by the Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources on 01.09.2022, which is referred to the impugned notice, learned counsel submits that the meeting had taken place.
10. The letter dated 16.08.2022 is prior in point of time to the meeting that was held on 01.09.2022, wherein, as indicated in the impugned notice, consent was given by the petitioner to complete all the internal works of all the buildings by 30.09.2022 and the external works by 31.10.2022.
11. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner had submitted reply and a decision is yet to be taken on the show-cause notice, we are of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case for invoking our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
12. Taking that view, the writ petition is dismissed.
