"%.. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Djvisson Bench ; Hpn'ble Shrl Dhirendra IVIishra, & Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar, JJ Writ Petition (c) No. 3841 of2010 Petitioner M/s Khalsa Jain Traders through its proprietor Surendra Pai Singh Hans Pal, aged about 43 years, son of Shri Darshan Singh Hans Pal, having shop No.8 at Gurudwara Building, Station Road, Rajpur, District Raipur (CG) -Versus- Respondents 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Home Department, DKS Bhavan, Raipur (CG) Director General of Police, Potice Headquarters, Raipur (CG) Deputy Inspector General of Police, (Planning and Provision), Potice Headquarters, Raipur (CG) Commandant, 4 Battalion, Chhattisgarh Armed Force, SVIana, Raipur (CG) In-charge, Central Stores, 4 Battalion, Chhattisgarh Armed Force, Mana, Raipur (CG) Present: Mr. Ashish Surana, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Vinay Harit, Dy. Advocate General for the State. ORALORDER Per Dhjrendra Mishra, J (11WMarch,2011) The petltioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of india and prayed for the following substantive reliefs: (i) That. this Hon'bie Court may kindly be pleaseci to set aside/quash the impugned order dated 09.10.2CX)9 (Annexure P/1) passed by Respondent No.2. (ii) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Responderit authorities to duly perform and discharge the agreement dated 01.09.2008 and make the payment of amount due i.e. Rs.3,97,682/- (Rs. 3,00,859/- for the goods supplied plus Rs.96,823/- for earnest money) with respect to goods supplied by the Petitioner firm along with the interest at prevaient bank rate. L (iii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner. 02. Shri Ashish Surana, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per terms and conditions of the agreement executed between the petitioner and the respondents, supply order in respect of supply of traffic jersey, as per samples sanctioned, was issued to the petitioner on 27.8.2008. The entlre goods was supplied by the petitioner. However, after supply of the entire goods, the respondents cancefled the supply order dated 27.8.2008, the agreement dated 1.9.2008and the security deposit was forfeited by invoking Ciause 17 of the Agreement. It was further contempiated that any excess amount spent on purchase of the above goods from other Firms shail be recoverable under Clause 16 of the Agreement and the petitioner has been blacklisted for a period of six years from the date of issue of the letter i.e. 9.10.20(B(AnnexureP/1). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that identical jssue was invoived in WP(c) No.6915/2009, M/s Pannalal Sundarlai Rathi Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others, and this Court aiiowed the writ petition vide order dated 24th February, 2010. and the instant petition may aiso be disposed of jn similar terms. 03. Shri Vinay Harit, learned Dy. Advocate General for the State/respondents submits that the subject-matter of the writ petitjon and issue involved jn this petition is similar to WP(c) No.6915/2009, and this petition may be disposed of in similar terms. 04. !n view of above submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Instant petition is disposed of in the following terms: (0 Impugned Order dated 9.10.2009 (Annexure P/1) is hereby quashed, (ii) Respondent No.1 is directed to order a discreet enquiry in the matter through some senior ofRcer of the State. not belonging to the police department; The enquiry should be completed within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, and appropriate action be taken in accordance with the enquiry report thereafter. Copy of the report be aiso fon^arded to the Registrar General of this Court forthwith. -— Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Sd/- R.N.Chandrakar Judge ^