IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.7215 OF 2009 M/S DAYANAND PRASAD SINHA &CO, VERSUS (1) THE STATE OF BIHAR (2) THE ENGINEER IN CHIEF,RCD (3) THE CHIEF ENGINEER, RCD AND (4) THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RCD, PATNA ----------- For the petitioner: Mr Shankar Dayal Singh, Advocate. For the State: Mr. A.A.G.,XI. 2 1.7.2009 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 28.4.2009 issued by Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Gulzarbagh, Patna, whereby he debarred the petitioner from participating in any fresh tender till he completes the work in question bearing Agreement No.S.B.D. No.43 of 2008-09 dated 4.3.2009. The petitioner submits that he was awarded a contract work, namely, Periodical renewal work in K.M. 209 (P) to 214(P) & 220(P) to 222N.H.19 and the agreement was signed in respect of the work vide Agreement No. SBD No.43 of 2008 – 2009 dated 4.3.2009. The agreement contemplated that the work programme be completed within time frame. For instance by 9th of March, 2009 the materials were to be collected on site and by 5th of April,2009 K.M. 209(P) to 214 (P) & 220 (P) to 222 N.H19 was to be completed. By the impugned order dated 28.4.2009 the Executive Engineer noticed that the petitioner has not started the work as yet and as such in view of letter no.2131 (s) dated 13.3.2009 and reminder, letter no.3719 (S) dated 20.4.2009 of the Principal Secretary, R.C.D., debarred him from participating in any fresh/ensuing tender till he completes the work in question. - 2 - The letters dated 13.3.2009 and 20.4.2009 issued by the Principal Secretary, R.C.D., Bihar ,Patna refers to standard bidding document. Clause 4.8 of Standard Bidding document prescribed the following conditions:- “ Even though the bidders meet the above qualifying criteria, they are subject to be disqualified if they have record of poor performance such as abandoning the works, not properly completing the contract, inordinate delays in completion, litigation history, or financial failure etc.” The petitioner submits that the impugned letter dated 28.4.2009 of Executive Engineer, R.C.D. – cum – N.H.Division, Gulzarbagh, Patna does not describe the true state of affairs. The petitioner is ahead of his target and has completed work for which he has time till October, 2009. He asserts that in fact he had completed the aforesaid work up to 214(P) for which he had time till October, 2009 under the terms and conditions. In support of his contention he refers to Running Account Bill dated 8.6.2009 as well as letter dated 30.5.2009 contained in Annexure-5. The learned counsel for the State submits that the claim cannot be accepted without due verification. The writ application is being disposed of with following directions. The respondent no.4 would verify the work done by the petitioner within three weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. In case respondent finds that petitioner has completed the - 3 - quantity of work needed to be completed on day of the verification to be made, the penal cause debarring the petitioner from participating in other tenders would be deemed withdrawn. In case respondent no.4 does not pass or make due verification within the aforesaid period the petitioner would be at liberty to participate in other tender also. Let a copy of this order be handed over to Sri P.K.Verma, AAG-XI, for onward communication. Anilkr.sinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J).