Bali Ram Prasad Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors - Court Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 2588 of 2012 Bali Ram Prasad .........Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. Ananda Sen For the Respondents: Mr. J.C. to A.G. 5/23.08.2013: This application has been filed for quashing Annexure-10 whereby the agreement of the petitioner has been cancelled and Rs. 208633.00 have been forfeited from the earnest money. It is submitted by Sri Ananda Sen, learned counsel for the petitioner that the said order has been passed without giving him any opportunity of hearing. Thus, the impugned order cannot be sustained. On the other hand, J.C. to A.G., submits that from Annexure-5 and 7 , it is clear that before cancelling the agreement, petitioner was given notice. Accordingly, he submits that ample opportunity of hearing given to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. Having heard the submissions, I have gone through the record of the case. From perusal of impugned order, it is clear that petitioner was given opportunity vide letter no. 1320 dated 15.10.2011 and letter no. 203 dated 8.2.2012 for completing the work within the stipulated time. It also appears from the impugned order that petitioner filed an affidavit in response to aforesaid letters, but in spite of that, he has not completed the work. The aforesaid statements made in the impugned order, finds support from Annexure-5 and 7. Under the said circumstance, I find that petitioner has been given ample opportunity before passing the impugned order. Thus, I find no illegality in the impugned order. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner may be given liberty to file suit. In my view, there is no impediment which prevent the petitioner from filing the suit. ( Prashant Kumar,J.) Sharda/-