The Rajasthan High Court has reiterated that in public matters like electricity supply, ordinarily ex-parte interim order ought not to be granted and even it was granted, the application for vacating stay was required to be considered expeditiously or the writ petition itself ought to have been decided finally.

The Court was considering an Appeal by a Electricity Department against an interim order whereby an ex-parte interim stay was granted in favour of Respondent restraining the Appellant from issuing work order to the lowest bidder for supply of conveyer belts crucial for electricity supply in the State.

The division-bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Ashutosh Kumar observed, "....in such matters, ordinarily ex-parte interim order ought not to have been granted and even it was granted, the application for vacating stay was required to be considered expeditiously or the writ petition itself ought to have been decided finally."

The Appellant was represented by Advocate Kartik Seth while the Respondent was represented by Advocate Sushil Daga.

The Counsel for the Appellants submitted that the order was passed without hearing the appellants and without material facts being brought to its notice The appellants applied for vacating stay by filing an application on various substantial grounds but the application remained pending despite several prayers made for expeditious disposal. However, the application was not considered despite repeated prayers made and therefore the present Appeal was restored.

It was submitted that the present case pertains to award of work for supply of conveyor belts, which is extremely essential for transportation of coal to boiler in the thermal plants and failure in the procurement of conveyor belts in time would lead to serious complexities resulting in stoppage of thermal power production and obstruction in supply of electricity in the State. He argued that the Court failed to appreciate that the learned Vacation Judge ought not to have passed the ex-parte interim order without hearing the appellants. It was averred that decision making process did not suffer from any manifest arbitrariness so as to warrant interference. Contending that the scope of judicial review in tender matters is extremely limited, he submitted that the Court stated did not appreciate that only on technical ground made out, procurement ought not to be stayed. He placed reliance upon various decisions including the Supreme Court's decision in N.G. Projects Ltd. vs. Vinod Kumar Jain & Ors. It was submitted that the Apex Court has time and again reiterated that in the matters of public projects, injunction should not be lightly granted and that even after filing an application for vacating stay, his application has not been heard till date.

The Court agreed with his submissions and noted that once there is an ex-parte interim order passed, as soon as the application for vacating stay is filed, the application is required to be decided one way or the other expeditiously and it cannot be allowed to remain pending for a long time

"It is relevant to note here that in the present case, the respondent/writ petitioner has challenged award of contract in the matter of procurement of conveyor belts. Learned counsel for the appellants has rightly brought to the notice of this Court that timely procurement of conveyor belts is absolutely essential to ensure continuous supply of coal leading to production of electricity and uninterrupted supply thereof to the consumers in the State," the Court observed.

The Appeal was accordingly allowed.

Cause Title: Rajasthan Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited and Ors. v Somi Conveyors Beltings Limited and Ors. (2024:RJ-JP:46473-DB)

Appearances:

Petitioner- Advocate Kartik Seth, Advocate Darsh Pareek, Advocate Keshav Parashar

Respondent- Advocate Sushil Daga, Advocate Anurag Kalawatia, Advocate Chitransh Mathur, Advocate Parul Singhal, Advocate Sumeer Sodhi

Click here to read/ download the Judgement: