Remanded¶29

M/s Centurion Remedies Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC15 Oct 2025CWJC/16908/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Blacklisting; three-year debarment; security deposit forfeiture; BMSICL; non-supply of medicines; show-cause notice; reply/objection not considered; natural justice; quasi-judicial function; total non-application of mind; order vitiated; set aside; remand for fresh order; due opportunity of hearing; three-month timeline; Oryx Fisheries (2010) 13 SCC 427 para 40; Patna High Court; CWJC 16908 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Impugned blacklisting order dated 26.09.2025 (letter no. 7562) set aside; matter remanded to the concerned authorities to pass a fresh order after due opportunity of hearing, following the principles laid down in Oryx Fisheries (2010) 13 SCC 427 para 40, within three months of receipt of the order. ¶29

M/s Centurion Remedies Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the blacklisting order dated 26.09.2025 (letter no. 7562) passed by the Managing Director, BMSICL was vitiated by total non-application of mind in failing to consider the petitioners' objections/reply to the show-cause notices, and was therefore liable to be set aside.

¶27

Court's answer

An authority exercising a quasi-judicial function is bound to consider the show-cause notices together with the affected party's objections and other materials; failure to do so amounts to total non-application of mind.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

Since the blacklisting authority gave no consideration to the petitioners' objection/reply to the show-cause notices, the impugned action dated 26.09.2025 is liable to be set aside and the matter remanded.

¶29

Key takeaways

The concerned authorities are to follow the principles laid down in Oryx Fisheries (2010) 13 SCC 427, para 40 and pass a fresh order after due opportunity of hearing, if any, within three months of receipt of this order.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, CWJC No. 16908 of 2025, decided 15-10-2025 (oral judgment by P. B. Bajanthri, CJ, with Alok Kumar Sinha, J on the bench). The Managing Director, BMSICL had blacklisted M/s Centurion Remedies Pvt. Ltd. for three years by letter no. 7562 dated 26.09.2025 for non-supply of important medicines, also forfeiting its security deposit, after show-cause notices dated 09.07.2024 and 23.07.2024 and the petitioners' reply dated 05.04.2025. Holding that the authority, exercising a quasi-judicial function, was bound to consider the show-cause notices read with the petitioners' objections and other materials, and that its total non-application of mind vitiated the order, the Court set aside the impugned action dated 26.09.2025 and remanded the matter, directing the authorities to follow Oryx Fisheries Private Ltd. v. Union of India, (2010) 13 SCC 427 (para 40) and pass a fresh order after due opportunity of hearing within three months of receipt of the order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16908 of 2025

¶2

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

¶3

M/s Centurion Remedies Pvt. Ltd. having its Registered Office at Plot No. G/5-6 and F/19, Industrial Estate, Gorwa, Vadodara, India, through its authorised representative Shashi Ranjan Singh, male, aged about 46 years, Son of Binod Prasad Singh, resident of Behind Darbhanga Nagar Nigam Sonapath, P.S. Nagar, Darbhanga, Bihar.

¶4

Shashi Ranjan Singh, Son of Binod Prasad Singh, resident of Behind Darbhanga Nagar Nigam Sonapath, P.S. Nagar, Darbhanga, Bihar.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

Bihar Medical Services and Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., Second and Third Floor, Swasthya Bhawan, behind IGIMS, Sheikhpura, Patna, Bihar through its Secretary.

¶10

The Managing Director, Bihar Medical Services and Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., Second and Third Floor, Swasthya Bhawan, behind IGIMS, Sheikhpura, Patna, Bihar.

¶11

The Chief General Manager (Supply Chain), Bihar Medical Services and Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., Second and Third Floor, Swasthya Bhawan, behind IGIMS, Sheikhpura, Patna, Bihar.

¶12

The General Manager, Bihar Medical Services and Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., Second and Third Floor, Swasthya Bhawan, behind IGIMS, Sheikhpura, Patna, Bihar.

¶13

... ... Respondent/s

¶14

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

¶15

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, Sr. Advocate Ms. Manini Jaiswal, Advocate Ms. Manas Rajdeep, Advocate Mr. Shubham Kr. Upadhyay, Advocate Mr. Rittik Prakash, Advocate Mr. Adya Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Advocate General Lalit Kishore, Sr. Advocate

¶16

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

¶17

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶18

and

¶19

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶20

Date : 15-10-2025

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.16908 of 2025 dt.15-10-2025 2/3

¶22

In the instant writ petition, petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :

¶23

“i. For issuance of an appropriate writ to quash the order dated 26.09.2025 contained in letter no. 7562 issued by the Managing Director, Bihar Medical Services and Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., Sheikhpura Patna (hereinafter referred to as BMSICL) whereby and where under the petitioner company has been blacklisted for a period of three years, for non-supply of important medicines, form the date of issue of the Impugned Order along with which the Security deposit has been forfeited. (Annexure P/12)

¶24

ii. During the pendency of the present writ application the letter no. 7562 dated 26.09.2025 may be kept in abeyance.

¶25

iii. For any other order(s) as Your Lordship may deem fit and proper in light of the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶26

2. Perusal of the records, it is evident that show-cause notices were issued on 09.07.2024 and 23.07.2024 to the petitioners for furnishing his say in respect of proposal to blacklist him for three years. Petitioners had submitted their reply to the show cause notices on 05.04.2025, thereafter, they were blacklisted for a period of three years on 26.09.2025.

¶27

3. Perusal of the blacklisting order, it is crystal clear that there is a total non- application of mind on behalf of the concerned authority insofar as not considering the petitioners’

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.16908 of 2025 dt.15-10-2025 3/3

¶29

objection/reply to the show-cause notices. The concerned authority is exercising quasi judicial function, therefore, he was bounden duty to consider show-cause notices read with the petitioners’ objections and other materials. There is no consideration in respect of the above factual aspects of the matter. On this count, impugned action of the respondents dated 26.09.2025 is liable to be set aside and the matter is required to be remanded. The concerned authorities are hereby requested to peruse Oryx Fisheries Private Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in (2010) 13 SCC 427, Paragraph-40.

¶30

4. The concerned authorities are hereby requested to follow the principles laid down in the aforementioned decision and proceed to pass a fresh order after due opportunity of hearing if any, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order.

¶31

(P. B. Bajanthri, CJ)

¶32

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)

¶33

GAURAV S./-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date	17.10.2025
Transmission Date

M/s Centurion Remedies Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Centurion Remedies Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Bihar Vs Karmraj Choudhary

Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (Biada) Vs Sarvshree Durga Sattu Udyog

Raghunath Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Yashoda Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Rehana Parveen Vs The State of Bihar

Vishal Kumar Vs The State of Bihar