Disposed

Mohan Bajpai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. P.W.D. Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC18 Aug 2025WRIC/7708/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single hearing order in a writ petition challenging a blacklisting order for non-compliance with work standards. The court queries service of notices and directs filing of an affidavit regarding notice service and existence of an arbitration clause while listing the matter.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Delhi bench to file an affidavit regarding service of notices and existence of arbitration clause. Case listed for future hearing.

Mohan Bajpai vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7708 of 2025

¶3

Petitioner :- Mohan Bajpai Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. P.W.D. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Kumar Singh,Anshu Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anuj Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed by Shri Anuj Kumar, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.4 today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel, who appears on behalf of StateRespondents and Shri Anuj Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no.4.

¶7

This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following main prayers :

¶8

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quash/set-aside the order dated 14.07.2025 vide letter no.405 न०पपा०पररि०हरिददोई / सपा०नन०नवि० /2025-26 passed by the opposite party no.4 (Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, District-Hardoi) contained as Annexure No.1, in the interest of justice."

¶9

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had been awarded the work pursuant to a work order issued on 29.03.2025 by the opposite party no.4 for the construction of CC Road and drain from the house of Nadir to the house of Riyaj Masjid and from the house of Shakila Begum to the house of Ishak in Ward No.25. It is submitted that the petitioner completed the work satisfactorily, however, the Councilor of Ward No.25 made a complaint on 27.06.2025 to the Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Hardoi alleging poor

¶10

quality of work. Based on the said complaint, the impugned order blacklisting the petitioner has been passed without issuing any show cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶11

We have perused the impugned order dated 14.07.2025 which records that at least two letters were issued to the petitioner dated 20.06.2025 and 28.06.2025, directing him to complete the work strictly in accordance with the standards prescribed in the work order. Since the petitioner did not comply the same, the blacklisting order was passed.

¶12

We specifically queried the petitioner as to whether he had received letters dated 20.06.2025 and 28.06.2025 sent by the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Hardoi. He has stated that he never received such letters.

¶13

Let a personal affidavit be filed by the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Hardoi, indicating whether the letters dated 20.06.2025 and 28.06.2025 were served upon the petitioner, and annexing therewith a copy of the work order/contract executed between the parties and further clarifying whether the contract contains any arbitration clause.

¶14

List this case on 15.09.2025.

¶15

Order Date :- 18.8.2025 Mahesh

¶16

Digitally signed by :- MAHESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohan Bajpai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. P.W.D. Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Bajpai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. P.W.D. Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dileep Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Panchayati Raj Lko and 5 Others

Smt. Mamta Devi and Another vs Shri Keshan

Rakesh Dhar Tripathi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing and Urban Planning Deptt. Lko. and Another

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Thru. Commissioner Sitting at 18 Delhi and 3 Others vs Dr. Paras Nath Ram

Tej Jagannath Singh Pno 012330140 vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

Shiv Chandra Rao Alias Shiv Chand Raw Gautam vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Social Welfare Deptt. and 4 Others