Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2015 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (8) TMI 1548 - HC - Indian LawsBlacklisting the petitioner from the panel of the respondent SDMC - non-payment by the petitioner of the outstanding dues - HELD THAT:- There can be no proposition of law in absolute terms that pendency of a litigation between the contractor and an authority / body / municipality / government, the dispute wherein entitles the authority / body / municipality / government to exercise the power to blacklist the contractor, cannot be a ground to deprive such authority / body / municipality / government from exercising the power of blacklisting. If it were to be so held, it would become very easy for a contractor to defeat the right of the authority / body / municipality / government to blacklist, by, as soon as the dispute has arisen, initiate the litigation - It would thus follow that the exercise of the power to blacklist is independent of any provision therefor in any law or in the contract. The right of the government / governmental agency to blacklist is in addition to the right to make a claim for the amount, which according to it is outstanding or any other right which it may have under the contract or law. Whether invocation of one right i.e. of initiating recovery proceedings, would bar the invocation of another right i.e. to blacklist? - HELD THAT:- The power to blacklist, in this case on the ground of non-payment of dues, is independent of the power to recover the said dues, whether by instituting arbitration proceedings or by instituting a suit for recovery of the said amount and the mere pendency of such proceedings would per se not be a bar to the exercise of the power to blacklist. If during the pendency of legal proceedings the power to blacklist has been invoked, what would be the proper fora for entertaining a challenge if any made to the exercise of such power-whether by way of an independent proceeding or by way of an application for interim relief in the pending legal proceedings? - HELD THAT:- If blacklisting is on the same grounds which are subject matter of pending legal proceedings, the proper mode for challenging the said action of blacklisting would be by way of an application for interim relief in the same legal proceedings. The adjudication of a challenge to the order of blacklisting would necessarily entail determination, at least prima facie, of the grounds of blacklisting. It is opined that the Court / Arbitral Tribunal before which the disputes are already pending adjudication, would be a more appropriate fora for determining the said factor and / or for balancing the equities, being already seized of the matter. Permitting such challenge to be made by an independent proceeding, whether by way of a suit or a writ petition, would not only lead to multiplicity of proceedings but may also be capable of conflicting views and decisions and which are to be best avoided. In the present case, rather than adopting the aforesaid course of action it is deemed appropriate that the Arbitrator Mr. Bharat Bhushan Addl. District Judge (Retd.), before whom the proceedings are pending, be requested to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible and before 30th November, 2015. The said time has been arrived at after understanding from the counsels the stage at which the arbitration proceedings are pending and the time required to be taken by them for further proceedings and on their assurance that they will not seek any adjournment and fully co-operate with the Arbitral Tribunal in disposal of the arbitration proceedings by the said date. Petition disposed off.
|