Allowed

S.K. Construction, v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC22 Aug 2022CWJC/4689/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court quashed a blacklisting order imposed for ten years due to lack of independent application of mind and absence of defined criteria. The matter was remanded for fresh inquiry and a lawful order.

What did the court decide?

The impugned blacklisting order dated 10.11.2020 was set aside and remanded to the Principal Secretary to be re-examined afresh and passed a lawful order.

S.K. Construction, Vs The State of Bihar — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4689 of 2021

¶2

======================================================

¶3

S.K. Construction, Benta Road, Laheriasarai, Darbhanga, Bihar through its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Singh aged about 50 Years, Son of Triveni Prasad Singh, R/o Village-Bharathi, Darbhanga, P.S.-Darbhanga District- Darbhanga.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Engineer-in-Chief, (Work Management), Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The Superintending Engineer, Road Construction Division, Darbhanga, Road Constriction Department, Bihar, Patna.

¶10

The Executive Engineer, Road Construction Division, Darbhanga, Road Constriction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶11

... ... Respondent/s

¶12

======================================================

¶13

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, Advocate Mr. Rajesh Kumar Jha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey, Advocate

¶14

======================================================

¶15

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

¶16

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA)

¶17

9 22-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶18

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash order dated 10.11.2020 passed by the Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna whereby he has blacklisted the petitioner’s firm for a period of 10 years.

¶19

The order Annexure 6 reads as under:

¶20

Patna High Court CWJC No.4689 of 2021(9) dt.22-08-2022 2/3

¶21

^^vihydÙkkZ esllZ ,l0ds0 dUlVªD”ku }kjk vfHk;ark izeq[k] lafonk izca/ku ds vkns”k fnukad&24-09-2020 ds fo:) ;g vihy nk;j dh gSA vfHk;ark izeq[k us vius vkns”k ds }kjk laosnd }kjk fufonk esa xyr dkxtkr viyksM fd;s tkus ds vk/kkj ij fcgkj Bsdsnkjh fuca/ku fu;ekoyh ds izko/kuksa ds vkyksd esa vihydÙkkZ ds fuca/ku dks 10 o’kkZs ds fy, dkyhd`r fd;k gSA

¶22

2- vihydÙkkZ us vihy vkosnu esa lefiZr fd;k gS fd iFk izeaMy] njHkaxk varxZr o’kZ 2017&18 esa muds }kjk tkys iz[kaM ds tksfx;kjk esa APHC Hkou fuekZ.k dk;Z dk vuqHko izek.k i= viyksM gks x;k Fkk] tks =qfViw.kZ gSA ;g muds dehZ ds pwd ls gqvk gSA mUgksaus vihy vkosnu esa [ksn izdV djrs gq, Hkfo’; esa bl rjg dh iqujko`fÙk ugha gksus dk oknk fd;k gSA mUgksaus ;g Hkh rdZ fn;k gS fd fcgkj Bsdsnkjh fuca/ku fu;ekoyh ds izko/kkuksa ds fujarjrk esa fuxZr foHkkxh; i=kad&4140 fnukad & 28-10-2015 dh dafMdk&8 esa Bhdsnkj }kjk fufonk izkIr djus ds fy, vxz/ku ;k izfrHkwfr jkf”k ,oa xyr dkxtkr lefiZr djus ij naM fn;s tkus dk izko/kku gSA

¶23

3- vihy vkosnd dks lqukA mUgksaus ;g Lohdkj fd;k gS fd iFk fuekZ.k foHkkx dh fufonk lefiZr djrs le; mUgksaus xyr vuqHko izek.k i= layXu fd;k gSA

¶24

4- ;g Lohdkj.kh; rF; gSA

¶25

5- vfHk;ark izeq[k us mudks lquus dk leqfpr volj iznku fd;k gSA

¶26

6- fufonk viyksfMax laosnd ds }kjk djuh gksrh gSA mldh rF;kRed “kq)rk lqfuf”pr djuk mudh ftEesnkjh gSA mUgksaus ,slk dksbZ rF; izLrqr ugha fd;k] ftlls mudh vufHkKrk ;k xSj bjknk izekf.kr gks ldsA

¶27

7- oSlh ifjfLFkfr esa vihy vkosnu dks fujLr fd;k tkr gSA **

¶28

A perusal of the aforesaid order does not make it clear

¶29

as to how the authority reached the conclusion that the petitioner should be blacklisted for a period of 10 years. The entire order is based on an admission contained in para 4. It does not look like as if the record has been examined or there

¶30

Patna High Court CWJC No.4689 of 2021(9) dt.22-08-2022 3/3

¶31

has been an independent application of mind by the authority in question besides criteria for blacklisting a firm for a particular number of years is not defined anywhere. It is settled law that blacklisting cannot be perpetual in nature but when it is for 10 years, it is evident that such a company/firm would almost cease to exist.

¶32

Without commenting any further on the issue, we set aside the order Annexure-6 in question and remit the matter back to the Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna to examine the matter afresh and pass an order as per law.

¶33

If necessary, the Principal Secretary shall be at liberty to call the parties for affording them an opportunity of hearing. The writ petition stands disposed off.

¶34

(Rajan Gupta, J)

¶35

(Dr. Anshuman, J)

¶36

P. Kumar

¶37

S.K. Construction, v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.K. Construction, v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajbanshi Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Lalan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary

Shiv Chandra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

M/s Rajesh Kumar Srivastava Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited

Ruma Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Sharvan Kumar Vs The General Manager, Indian Oil Corporation