Allowed

Ghai Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Port Rail and Ropeway Corporation Ltd.

Delhi HC24 May 2024W.P.(C)/4475/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court upheld the writ petition and set aside an impugned communication blacklisting the petitioner. The order noted the absence of a mandatory show cause notice rendered the action contrary to natural justice principles laid down in precedents, allowing the respondent to issue a fresh notice. The petition was disposed of on this ground.

What did the court decide?

Impugned Communication dated 27.12.2023 blacklisting the petitioner set aside; writ petition disposed of; respondent permitted to issue fresh show cause notice.

Ghai Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs Indian Port Rail… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~56

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 4475/2024

¶4

GHAI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Udit Seth and Mr. Divyanshu, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

INDIAN PORT RAIL AND ROPEWAY CORPORATION LTD

¶8

..... Respondent

¶9

Through: Mr. S. G. Rajput, Advocate.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

¶11

O R D E R % 24.05.2024

¶12

The Petitioner has approached this Court challenging the Communication dated 27.12.2023 issued by the Respondent blacklisting the Petitioner for a period of three years from participating in any tender issued by the Respondents.

¶13

Mr. S. G. Rajput, learned Counsel, is appearing on behalf of the Respondent. He states that Vakalatnama has been filed.

¶14

Material on record indicates that the Petitioner was awarded a contract for “Construction of 2 lane ROB & approaches in lieu of L.C No.104E/SPL3 at Km. 97/6-7 between Cherukuwasa & Undi railway stations on Gudivada - Bhimavaram section at NH Km. 170+400 on Kathipudi - Pamarru road of NH 214 (New NH-165) in West Godavari district I state of Andhra Pradesh”.

¶15

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/05/2024 at 11:55:25

¶16

A perusal of the Communication dated 27.12.2023 reveals that no show cause notice has been issued to the Petitioner informing that the Petitioner will be blacklisted for a period of three years. The action of blacklisting the Petitioner is, therefore, contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court in Gorkha Security Services v. Government (NCT of Delhi) and Ors., (2014) 9 SCC 105 and UMC Technologies Private Limited v. Food Corporation of India & Anr., 2021 (2) SCC 551. The Apex Court in Gorkha Security Services v. Government (NCT of Delhi) and Ors., (2014) 9 SCC 105, in categorical terms has held that the action of debarment has to be preceded by a notice specifically informing the Noticee that it will be debarred for any infringement and in the absence of any notice, the order of debarment cannot be passed. The Apex Court has held as under:

¶17

“16. It is a common case of the parties that the blacklisting has to be preceded by a show-cause notice. Law in this regard is firmly grounded and does not even demand much amplification. The necessity of compliance with the principles of natural justice by giving the opportunity to the person against whom action of blacklisting is sought to be taken has a valid and solid rationale behind it. With blacklisting, many civil and/or evil consequences follow. It is described as “civil death” of a person who is foisted with the order of blacklisting. Such an order is stigmatic in nature and debars such a person from participating in government tenders which means precluding him from the award of government contracts.”

¶18

In view of the above, since no show cause notice has been issued to the Petitioner, this Court is inclined to set aside the Impugned Communication dated 27.12.2023. The Impugned Communication dated 27.12.2023 is set aside.

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/05/2024 at 11:55:25

¶21

However, it is always open for the Respondent to issue a fresh show cause notice to the Petitioner and proceed further in accordance with law.

¶22

It is made clear that the Impugned Communication dated 27.12.2023 is set aside only on the ground that no show cause notice has been issued to the Petitioner informing that the Petitioner can be debarred.

¶23

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of, along with pending application(s), if any.

¶24

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

¶25

MAY 24, 2024 S. Zakir

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/05/2024 at 11:55:25

Ghai Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Port Rail and Ropeway Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghai Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Port Rail and Ropeway Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ankit Agarwal -Legal Heir of Late Shanti Kumar Aggarwal Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 27, Delhi & Anr.

Saksham Commodities Limited Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 22(1), Delhi & Anr.

Saksham Commodities Limited Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 22(1), Delhi & Anr.

Vikas Associates Pvt. Ltd. Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 26(3) & Anr.

Sethia Enterprises through Its Proprietor Mr Vikash Jain Vs Commissioner Delhi Goods and Service Tax and Others

Kunal Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Another

Vishwas Pathak Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Mayapuri Cetp Society Vs Dpcc and Anr.

Maheshwari Service Station & Anr. Vs Indian Oil Corporation Limited & Ors.

Samir Sardana Vs the Secretary Central Information Commission & Anr.

Samir Sardana Vs Central Information Commission & Anr.

Sonali Chhaburao Gite Vs Union of India & Ors.

Kundan Kumar Sinha Vs Union of India & Ors.

Raj Kumar Goel Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited & Ors.