Full Text
W.P.(C) 895/2016 & CMNo.3919/2016 & 3920/2016
JUDGMENT
4 M/S EMAAR MGF CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD Petitioner Through; Mr. Arvind Nigam, Sr. Adv.with Ms. Manmeet Arora, Ms. Chand Chopra and Mr. Tarang Gupta, Advs.
VERSUS
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Verma, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Kartik Jindal, Adv. forDDA. + W.P.(C) 991/2016 & CMNo.4318/2016 & 4319/2016 5 M/S. EMAAR PROPERTIES PJSC Petitioner Through: Mr. Atul Sharma, Mr. Yash Srivastava, Mr. Abhishek Sharma and Mr. Chaitanya Puri, Advs.
VERSUS
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS Respondents forDDA. + W.P.(C) 1054/2016 & CMNo.4586/2016 & 4587/2016 6 EMAAR MGF LAND PVT LTD Petitioner Through: Mr. Arvind Nigam, Sr. Adv.with Ms. Manmeet Arora, Ms. Chand Chopra and Mr. Tarang Gupta, Advs.
VERSUS
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Respondent forDDA. 2016:DHC:9284 + W.P.(C) 1072/2016 & CMNo.4691/2016 & 4692/2016 8 M/S DISCOVERY ESTATES PVT LTD Petitioner Through: Mr. Akhil Sachar, Adv.
VERSUS
DDA Respondent for DDA. + W.P.(C) 1089/2016 & CMNo.4736/2016 & 4737/2016 9 M/S MGF DEVELOPMENTS LTD Petitioner Through: Mr. Akhil Sachar, Adv.
VERSUS
DDA Respondent for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.
JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA ORDER % 16.02.2016 CM No.3920/2016 in W.P.(C) 895/2016 CM No.4319/2016 in W.P.(C) 991/2016 CM No.4587/2016 in W.P.(C) 1054/2016 CM No.4692/2016 in W.P.(C) 1072/2016 CM No.4737/2016 in W.P.(C) 1089/2016 Allowed, subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C)895/2016 & CM No.3919/2016 W.P.(C)991/2016 & CM No.4318/2016 W.P.(C)1054/2016 & CM No.4586/2016 W.P.(C)1072/2016 & CMNo.4691/2016 W.P.(CU089/2016 & CM No.4736/2016
1. Issue notice. Learnedcounsel for respondents accepts notice. M
2. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 14^^ October, 2015 passed by the Contractor's Registration Board, Delhi Development Authority whereby the petitioners have been black listed for participation in any public, private, partnership projects of the Government of India for a period of three years. The main ground of challenge in all these petitions is that no opportunity of personal hearing was afforded to the petitioners before passing the impugned order dated 14^*^ October, 2015. Reliance is placed on M/s Kulja Industries Ltd. v. Chief Gen. Manager W.T. Proj. BSNL, in which the Supreme Court has held that the authority passing the black listing order is required to give a fair hearing before passing the order.
3. Mr. Ajay Verma, learned senior standing counsel for DDA submits on instructions from Mr. Nahar Singh, Superintending Engineer and Secretary of the Board present in Court with the relevant record that no hearing was afforded to the petitioners because it was not sought for. Mr. Ajay Verma, learned senior standing counsel for DDA further submits that Board shall give opportunity of personal hearing and till then, the impugned order shall be kept in abeyance.
4. Learned counsels for the petitioner in W.P.(C) 991/2016, 1054/2016, 1072/2016 & 1089/2016 submit that they could not file the reply as the showcause notice was not properly served on them. Learned counsels seek time to file a reply to the showcause notice.
5. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C) 895/2016 seeks permissionto file an additional replyto the showcause notice.
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case. Contractor's Registration Board, Delhi Development Authority shall afford a fair and reasonable opportunity for hearing to the petitioners. The petitioners in W.P.(C) 991/2016, 1054/2016, 1072/2016 & 1089/2016 are permitted to file their reply to the showcause notice dated 28^'' August, 2015 whereas the petitioner in W.P.(C) 895/2016 is permitted to file additional reply within a period of two weeks from today. Contractor's Registration Board, Delhi Development Authority shall intimate the date of personal hearing to the petitioners as well as their counsels. Contractor's Registration Board, Delhi Development Authority shall consider the submissions of the petitioners to pass a fresh order and till then, the order dated 14'*^ October, 2015 shall remain in abeyance.
7. Learned counsels for the petitioners submit that the copy of order dated 14^*^ October, 2015 has been sent to various authorities mentioned in ^ page 3and 4ofthe order. Delhi Development Authority shall send the copy of this order to the concerned authorities to whom the order dated 14^*^ October, 2015 had been sent.
8. Learned counsels for the petitioners submit that the order dated 14^^ October, 2015 has been loaded on the website of Delhi Development Authority and, therefore, the copy ofthis order be also uploaded there. Ifthe order dated 14^^ October, 2015 has been loaded on the website, Delhi Development Authority shall upload this order also on the website.
9. It is clarified that this Court has not examined the merits of these cases which shall be considered by the Contractor's Registration Board, Delhi Development Authority after hearing both the parties.
10. The petitions as well as the stay applications are disposedof
11. Copy of this order be given dasti to counsels for the parties under signature of Court Master. LR. MIDHA, J. FEBRUARY 16, 2016 ak