IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7872/2004 M/s Synergy Waste Management Company and Another Versus The State of Rajasthan and Another Date of Order ::: 10.03.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Alok Garg, Counsel for petitioners Shri V.D. Sharma, Deputy Government Advocate, for respondents #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 12.04.2004 (Annexure-3) passed by the Director, Local Bodies, Rajasthan, Jaipur, whereby a sum of Rupees two lacs, which were lying deposited with the respondent as earnest money has been ordered to be forfeited. A notice to show cause was given to the respondents on 07.11.2005. Notices were served on the respondents in December, 2005 and the matter was listed on 03.01.2006 and two weeks time was allowed to the learned Deputy Government Advocate for filing reply to the writ petition and since then the matter was listed before this Court on number of occasions and on all the dates time was sought on behalf of the respondents to file reply but till date reply to the writ petition has not been filed. The learned counsel for the petitioners has raised various submissions but his first and foremost submission is that before passing the impugned order dated 12.04.2004 (Annexure-3), no notice was given to the petitioners, therefore, the impugned order has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and the same is liable to be quashed only on this ground alone. The learned counsel for the respondents is unable to defend the impugned order as nothing has been mentioned in it as to whether any reasonable opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners before forfeiting the amount of earnest money. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and, after considering their submissions as well as the impugned order dated 12.04.2004 (Annexure-3), I find that before passing the impugned order dated 12.04.2004 the respondents did not serve any notice as to why the amount of earnest money may not be forfeited. It was a duty of the respondents to afford a reasonable opportunity to the petitioners before forfeiting the amount of earnest money, and, in my view, the impugned order is liable to be quashed only on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice without going into any other submissions of learned counsel for the parties. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 12th April, 2004 (Annexure-3) passed by the respondent No.2, the Director, Local Bodies, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, is quashed. It will be open for the respondents to pass fresh order in this regard after serving a notice and affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. There will be no order as to costs. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman// IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.6775/2004 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7872/2004 M/s Synergy Waste Management Company and Another Versus The State of Rajasthan and Another Date of Order ::: 10.03.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Alok Garg, Counsel for petitioners Shri V.D. Sharma, Deputy Government Advocate, for respondents #### By the Court:- In view of the order passed in the writ petition, the stay application, filed therewith, stands disposed of. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//