$~72
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 5702/2011 & CM No.11638/2011 (for stay)
M/S ENKAY ELECTRICALS INDIA (REGD.) ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sugriva Dubey, Adv.
Versus
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF SUPPLIES AND DISPOSALS
DELHI DIRECTORATE OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ..Respondent
Through: Mr. Jatan Singh & Mr. Kunal Kahol,
Advocates for UOI with Mr. Onkar
Nath, Section Officer.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
ORDER
% 09.08.2011
1. The grievance made in the petition is the same as made by Allied
Engineering Works in W.P.(C) No.5223/2011 disposed of on 28 th July,
2011.
2. The counsel for the respondent appearing on advance notice has fairly
stated that the decision on the show cause notice already issued to the
petitioner shall be taken within six weeks. On enquiry as to why even this
much time is required to take decision, the reply having already been
submitted by the petitioner, the counsel states that since the rate contracts
W.P.(C) 5702/2011 Page 1 of 4
pertains to Dadra Nagar Haveli and all the records will have to be obtained,
this much minimum time is required.
3. The counsel for the respondent has today further drawn attention to
Clause 24 of the General Terms and Conditions and which clause is as
under:
“24. Revocation/Cancellation of Rate Contract
Since the Rate Contract is a standing offer and is merely
a document embodying various terms of the standing offer
made by the Contractor for acceptance by the Purchaser, either
party namely, the R/C holder/the Purchaser can legally
revoke/cancel the Rate Contract at any time during the
currency of the Rate Contract giving a notice of 45 days. The
revocation of the Rate Contract on the part of the R/C holder
shall take effect 45 days from the date of the communication of
revocation is received by the Purchaser. The cancellation of
the Rate Contract by the Purchaser shall take effect 45 days
from the date of issue of letter notifying the short-closure.”
4. He has contended that the rate contract could thus be foreclosed with
a 45 days notice without finding any reason and thus the agreement cannot
be said to be specifically enforcible. It is further contended that while
Allied Engineering Works had approached this Court well before the date of
foreclosure i.e. before 8th August, 2011, the petitioner herein has preferred
this petition only thereafter and the Rate Contract already stands foreclosed
vide orders made yesterday i.e. on 8th August, 2011, copy of which has been
W.P.(C) 5702/2011 Page 2 of 4
handed over in the Court. It is thus contended that the petitioner would not
be entitled to the relief sought of setting aside foreclosure, as was given to
Allied Engineering Works. Else, it is stated that the same order as in Allied
Engineering Works may be followed.
5. The counsel for the petitioner has contended that this petition was
also filed on 6th August, 2011 i.e. prior to the specified date of foreclosure
i.e. 8th August, 2011.
6. However attention of this Court on 28th July, 2011 while disposing of
the writ petition preferred by Allied Engineering Works having not been
invited to Clause 24 (supra) which enables the respondent to foreclose with
a 45 days notice without any reason also, it is deemed appropriate that the
decision regarding foreclosure qua the petitioner awaits the decision on the
show cause notice already issued.
7. The petition is accordingly disposed of with the direction that till the
respondent in pursuance to the show cause notice and after hearing the
petitioner makes an order finding the petitioner guilty of the offences with
which it is charged, the respondent shall not take any steps of de-registration
of the petitioner. However since the contract with the petitioner already
W.P.(C) 5702/2011 Page 3 of 4
stands foreclosed, it is directed that the order aforesaid be made and
communicated to the petitioner on or before 10th October, 2011. If the
order/decision is in favour of the petitioner, the foreclosure shall also stand
set aside. Conversely, if the order/decision is against the petitioner, the
petitioner shall have remedy in law.
The petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
CM No.11639/2011 (for exemption)
Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
Copy of this order be given Dasti to the counsels for the parties.
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J
AUGUST 09, 2011
bs
W.P.(C) 5702/2011 Page 4 of 4