Disposed¶49

Ms Saptagon Asia Private Limited v. the Union of India

Gauhati HC1 Jun 2026WP(C)/3647/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court; WP(C) No. 3647/2025 with linked WP(C) No. 4833/2025; decided 02.06.2026; Kaushik Goswami J; NHAI debarment order dated 09.06.2025 by respondent No. 4 (GM Tech, NE Division); twelve-month debarment 09.06.2025 to 09.06.2026; casualty at Baihata (NH-27) construction site on 28.02.2024; interim orders dated 24.07.2025 and 16.09.2025 made absolute; debarment order set aside qua petitioners; writ petitions disposed of; no order as to costs; respondents did not press for merits adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Interim orders dated 24.07.2025 (WP(C) No. 3647/2025) and 16.09.2025 (WP(C) No. 4833/2025) made absolute; the debarment order dated 09.06.2025 set aside insofar as it relates to the petitioners; both writ petitions disposed of; no order as to costs. ¶49

Ms Saptagon Asia Private Limited Vs the Union of India — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶49

Issue for consideration

Whether the debarment order dated 09.06.2025 issued by respondent No. 4 - debarring the petitioner for twelve months (09.06.2025 to 09.06.2026) over its alleged responsibility for the casualty at the construction site at Baihata (NH-27) on 28.02.2024 - was sustainable. +1 more

¶34

Court's answer

The interim order dated 24.07.2025 in WP(C) No. 3647/2025 and the interim order dated 16.09.2025 in WP(C) No. 4833/2025 are made absolute.

¶47

Ratio / Principle

The debarment order dated 09.06.2025 stands set aside insofar as it relates to the petitioners.

¶48

Key takeaways

No useful purpose would be served by keeping the writ petitions pending for further adjudication on merits, having regard to the continuance of the interim protection granted by this Court and the limited duration of the impugned debarment order; the interests of justice are adequately served by confirming the interim orders already passed.ratio¶45

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Kaushik Goswami J.), WP(C) No. 3647/2025 with linked WP(C) No. 4833/2025, order dated 02.06.2026 - Challenge to NHAI debarment order dated 09.06.2025 issued by respondent No. 4 debarring the petitioner-consultants from participating in any form in NHAI/NHIDCL/NH and all Divisions/Units of the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways for twelve months (09.06.2025 to 09.06.2026) over alleged responsibility for the casualty at the Baihata (NH-27) construction site on 28.02.2024 - Interim stays dated 24.07.2025 and 16.09.2025 had operated throughout the proceedings, resting on a prima facie view that the contractual clauses allegedly violated had no direct application to the accident - At final hearing, respondent authorities fairly submitted that the one-year debarment was nearing completion and did not seek adjudication on merits - Held: interim orders made absolute; the debarment order dated 09.06.2025 set aside insofar as it relates to the petitioners; both writ petitions disposed of; no order as to costs.

Page No.# 1/9

GAHC010139192025

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/3647/2025

¶6

MS SAPTAGON ASIA PRIVATE LIMITED 9FORMERLY G-ENG ADVISORY PVT. LTD, HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT PLOT EMERALD ESTATE PRIMARY SCHOOL, ADJACENT WORLD MARKET MALL, SECTOR 65, GURUGRAM, GURGAON, HARYANA,

¶7

REP. BY AUTH. REP. KUMARI PRIYANKA, AGE-26,

¶8

D/O- JAI SINGH HOODA, RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO 295 GALI NO 2, DAYANAND NAGAR, BAHADURGARH, HARYANA

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA , MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS TRANSPORT BHAWAN, NEW DELHI

¶11

2:THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA UNDER MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS) REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN G-5AND6 SECTOR-10 DWARKA NEW DELHI

¶12

3:THE REGIONAL OFFICER NORTH EAST DIVISION NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA NEDFI HOUSE

¶13

Page No.# 2/9

¶14

4TH FLOOR G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI PIN-781006. 4:GENERAL MANAGER (TECH) NORTH EAST DIVISION NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA NEDFI HOUSE 4TH FLOOR G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI PIN -781006. 5:DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (TECH) PROJECT DIRECTOR NORTH-EAST DIVISION NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA NEDFI HOUSE 4TH FLOOR G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI PIN-781006. 6:THE PROJECT DIRECTOR NHAI PIU BONGAIGAON (NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA) DOLAIGAON MAJPARA (OPP.NAAM GHAR) DISTRICT - BONGAIGAON ASSAM 7:MS SHIV BUILDINDIA PRIVATE LIMITED HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 401 SIDHHRAJ ZAVOD NEAR SARGASAN CROSS ROAD S.G. HIGHWAY SARGASAN GANDHINAGAR GUJARAT. PIN - 382421 ALSO HAVING OFFICE AT PATHSALA DISTRICT - BAJALI ASSAM

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S R A NASER, MD F FARIDI,MR. A DHAR,MR P S DEKA,MR. A CHETRY

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. S K MEDHI(C.G.C),SC, NHAI

¶17

Page No.# 3/9

¶18

Linked Case : WP(C)/4833/2025

¶19

M/S KHANNA DESIGNERS AND CONSULTANTS PVT LTD (CORPORATE IDENTITY NUMBER U74900PB2013PTC037662) HAVING ITS REGD OFFICE AT H.NO-672 SST NAGAR PATIALA PUMJAB PIN-147001 INDIA AND ALSO HAVING ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT 473 PACE CITY -II SECTOR -37 GURUGRAM HARYANA PIN-122004 REP. HEREIN BY BANAMALI ROUTH AGE 32 YRS S/O- BIKASH ROUTH PERMANENT R/O- H.NO-16 GALI NO-2 VILL- TIKRI SECTOR 48 GURRGAON HARYANA PIN-122018 2: SUMEET KHANNA S/O- SUBHASH CHANDER KHANNA PERMANENT RESIDENT OF

¶20

VILLA NO-3 TULIP IVORY SECTOR 70 BADSHAHPUR GURGAON PIN-122101 AND MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE M/S KHANNA DESIGNER AND CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED I.E OETIONER NO-1 (DIN-07901541) PRESENTLY R/O- VILLA NO-3 TULIP IVORY SECTOR 70 GURGAON PIN-122101 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHRS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA

¶21

Page No.# 4/9

¶22

MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS TRANSPORT BHAWAN-1 PARLIAMENT STREET NEW DELHI-01 2:THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN G 5 AND 6 SECTOR 10 DWARKA NEW DELHI-110075. 3:THE REGIONAL OFFICER NORTH EAST DIVISION THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA NEDFI HOUSE 4TH FLOOR G.S ROAD GUWAHATI-06 4:GENERAL MANAGER (TECH) NE DIVISION THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA NEDFI HOUSE 4TH FLOOR G.S ROAD GUWAHATI-06 5:DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (TECH) PROJECT DIRECTOR NE DIVISION THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA NEDFI HOUSE 4TH FLOOR G.S ROAD GUWAHATI-06 6:THE PROJECT DIRECTOR NHAI PIU-BONGAIGAON (NHAI) DOLAIGAON MAJPARA (OPP. NAMGHAR) DIST- BONGAIGAON ASSAM 7:M/S SHIV BUILDINDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

¶23

Page No.# 5/9

¶24

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 401 SIDHHRAJZAVOD NEAR SARGASAN CROSS ROAD S.G. HIGHWAY SARGASAN GANDHINAGAR GUJARAT PIN-382421 ALSO HAVING OFFICE AT PATHSALA DISTRICT-BAJALI ASSAM

¶25

8:M/S TPF ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED

¶26

REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 1401 RUPA SAPPHIRE PLOT NO. 12 SECTOR 18 OPPOSITE SANPADA RAILWAY SION-PANVEL HWY VASHI NAVI MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA PIN-4004705

¶27

9:MAV ASSOCIATES LLP

¶28

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 1ST FLOOR A-21 PUSHPANJALI ENCLAVE PITAMPURA DELHI PIN-110034 -----------Advocate for : MS. S NATH Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHRS

¶29

Page No.# 6/9

¶30

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI

¶31

ORDER

¶32

Date : 02.06.2026

¶33

Heard Mr. A. Dhar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in WP(C) No. 3647/2025 and Mr. P. S. Deka, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in WP(C) No. 4833/2025. Also heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. R. Bora, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 to 6 and Ms. R. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 in WP(C) No. 3647/2025.

¶34

2. By way of WP(C) No. 3647/2025, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 09.06.2025 issued by the respondent No. 4 whereby the petitioner was debarred from participating in any form in NHAI/NHIDCL/NH and all Divisions/Units of the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways for a period of twelve months commencing from 09.06.2025 till 09.06.2026, on the allegation that the petitioner was responsible for the casualty which occurred at the construction site at Baihata (NH-27) on 28.02.2024.

¶35

3 . WP(C) No. 4833/2025 has been instituted by another consultant associated with the same project, namely, the Proof Consultant, challenging the very same order dated 09.06.2025 insofar as it pertains to the said petitioner.

¶36

4 . The records reveal that while entertaining WP(C) No. 3647/2025, this Court, by order dated 24.07.2025, upon hearing the parties and upon a prima facie examination of the relevant contractual provisions, stayed the effect and operation of the impugned order dated

¶37

Page No.# 7/9

¶38

09.06.2025 pending disposal of the writ petition. Subsequently, by order dated 16.09.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 4833/2025, similar interim protection was extended to the petitioner therein.

¶39

5 . The order dated 24.07.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 3647/2025 records, inter alia, a prima facie finding that the contractual clauses alleged to have been violated by the petitioner did not appear to have any direct application to the allegations arising out of the accident that occurred on 28.02.2024. On such consideration, this Court had found it appropriate to stay the operation of the impugned debarment order.

¶40

6 . Likewise, while passing the order dated 16.09.2025 in WP(C) No. 4833/2025, this Court had observed that the petitioner therein stood on a footing warranting similar interim protection and consequently stayed the operation of the impugned order insofar as the said petitioner was concerned.

¶41

7 . When the matters were taken up for final consideration, Mr. D. Saikia, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 6, fairly submitted that the debarment in question was operative only for a period of one year, i.e., from 09.06.2025 to 09.06.2026. He further submitted that in view of the limited tenure of the impugned order and the fact that the said period was nearing completion, the respondents do not seek adjudication of the disputes on merits.

¶42

8 . This Court has considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and has also perused the materials available on record.

¶43

Page No.# 8/9

¶44

9 . It is not in dispute that the interim orders passed on 24.07.2025 and 16.09.2025 respectively have remained in force throughout the pendency of the writ proceedings. The said orders were passed after recording prima facie reasons and after considering the rival contentions of the parties.

¶45

10 . This Court also takes note of the fair stand adopted by the respondent authorities that they do not seek adjudication of the writ petitions on merits at this stage. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, particularly having regard to the continuance of the interim protection granted by this Court and the limited duration of the impugned debarment order, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present writ petitions pending for a further adjudication on merits.

¶46

11 . The interests of justice would, in the opinion of this Court, be adequately served by confirming the interim orders already passed in favour of the petitioners.

¶47

12 . Accordingly, the interim order dated 24.07.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 3647/2025 and the interim order dated 16.09.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 4833/2025 are hereby made absolute.

¶48

13 . Consequently, the order dated 09.06.2025, insofar as it relates to the petitioners herein, stands set aside.

¶49

14. Both the writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms.

¶50

Page No.# 9/9

¶51

15 . No order as to costs.

¶52

JUDGE

¶53

Comparing Assistant