Ramesh Kumar Rana vs State Of HP And Others

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to renew his enlistment as Class-C contractor from due date.

The case as set-up is that the petitioner was enlisted as Class-C contractor by the respondents. His enlistment was renewed vide office memo dated 17.12.2018 for a period of two years i.e. from 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2019. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prior to 31.03.2019, the petitioner applied for renewal of his enlistment and deposited the renewal fee etc., however, the respondents have not renewed the petitioner's enlistment.

The stand of the respondents is that subsequent to the enlistment of the petitioner as Class-C contractor, 'Rules of Enlistment of Contractors in HP PWD 2015' came into force. Clause 19.2 of the Enlistment rules provided as under : -

"A contractor who fails to revalidate his enlistment on due date can submit fresh application for Enlistment if he fulfills all the eligibility criteria provided he has participated in tenderinig process in HP,PWD, of appropriate magnitude but remained second lowest or third lowest on at least 3 occasions (with documentary proof) during the validity period of his Enlistment.

Provided that the contractors already enlisted before coming into force these rules and do not fulfill the criteria under these rules, their validity may be extended for two years in first instance under the provision of the old rules on merit and thereafter further revalidation for the remaining period shall be granted, only when the contractor satisfies the criterion laid down under these rules. However, the cost of application form, processing fee and revalidation fees shall be applicable as provided under these rules."

Petitioner's licence of Class-C contractor was renewed accordingly vide office memo dated 17.12.2018 for a period of two years i.e. upto 31.03.2019. This renewal was in terms of 2015 Enlistment Rules. For further extension of renewal, the petitioner had to fulfill the eligibility criteria laid down in Rule 19.6 of the Rules. As per Rule 19.6 of the Enlistment Rules 2015, an applicant in 'Civil' category must have executed at least one civil work of value not less than Rs. 15.00 lacs. The petitioner did not fulfill this criteria. Therefore, his case for renewal was sent back for re-submission after attending the observations/objections. The petitioner did not respond thereafter.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the case file.

The Enlistment Rules 2015 are not under challenge. The petitioner's licence of Class-C contractor was renewed by the respondents vide office memo dated 17.12.2018 for a period of two years i.e. 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2019 as per Clause 19.2 of the Enlistment Rules. For revalidation, he had to satisfy the eligibility criteria prescribed in Clause 19.6 of the Enlistment Rules 2015. According to the respondents, the petitioner does not fulfill the criteria for enlistment in terms of Rule 19.6 of the Enlistment Rules. This fact is not even disputed by the petitioner. Under these circumstances, no fault can be found with the respondents' not renewing the licence of the petitioner. The relief prayed for by the petitioner cannot be granted to him in the instant petition.

Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. However, it goes without saying that the petitioner has a right to apply for fresh enlistment as per criteria laid down under the Rules. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.