Partly allowed

Parteek Jain v. Director Food Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs Dpt & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Mar 2014CWP/4815/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside an indefinite blacklisting order passed without a show cause notice. It held that while challenging the delay in raising the issue, there exists no time limit for blacklisting, directing the State to issue a circular on the legal position to prevent future litigation.

What did the court decide?

Impugned blacklisting order dated 22.4.2012 set aside without show cause; direction to Issue show cause for fresh order if required and issue circular by State.

Parteek Jain Vs Director Food Civil… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

I N THE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDI GARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.4815 of 2014 (O&M) DATE OF DECI SI ON: 14.03.2014

Sh. Parteek Jain

…..Petitioner

versus

The Director, Food Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs Department, Punjab and others .....Respondents

¶7

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTI CE SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL, CHI EF JUSTI CE HON’BLE MR. JUSTI CE ARUN PALLI

¶8

Present: Mr. Harnaik, Singh, Advocate for the petitioner

¶9

SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL, CHI EF JUSTI CE : (Oral)

¶10

Admit.

¶11

Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Advocate General, Punjab accepts

¶12

notice for the respondents.

¶13

A complete set of paper-book be supplied to learned

¶14

Advocate General during the course of the day.

¶15

At the request of learned counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for hearing today itself.

¶16

The petitioner having been allotted the tender as L-1 is alleged not to have signed the requisite docum ents. Surprisingly, he claims ignorance about being assigned the contract and after two years seeks to raise the issue about cancellation of the contract. It is obvious that having failed to execute the tender documents and having been visited with the consequences thereof, the issue is belatedly sought to be raised which we are not inclined to examine.

¶17

The second part of the grievance arises from the consequent

¶18

blacklisting order for future contracts which is dated 22.4.2012. The challenge is also highly belated and normally we would not have

¶19

Chand Parkash 2014.03.14 14:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CW P- No. 4815 of 2014

¶21

- 2 –

¶22

interfered. However, the problem is that there is no time limit fixed for this blacklisting, an aspect well settled in law (Suprem e Court decision in Civil Appeal No.8944 of 2013 titled as M/ s Kulja I ndustries Limited vs. Chief Gen. Manager W .T. Proj. BSNL & Ors., decided on 4.10.2013 ). We keep on receiving cases one after the other having same problem, i.e., contrary to law blacklisting is being done for unlimited period of time

¶23

We have, thus, called upon the learned Advocate General for State of Punjab so that a circular can be issued by the State itself to all statutory bodies and State authorities pointing out the legal position so that unnecessary litigation does not take place on this issue.

¶24

It is pointed out that even show cause notice has not been issued prior to blacklisting which is the result of violation of Conditions No.16 and 19 of the revised policy of Labour Cartage for the year 201213.

¶25

We have, thus, no option but to set aside the impugned orders dated 22.4.2012 blacklisting the petitioner for indefinite period of time without show cause notice, making it clear that it does not prevent the respondents from passing a fresh order in accordance with law after issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner.

¶26

Copy of order be given dasti under signatures of Bench Secretary to learned Advocate General.

¶27

14.03.2014 ( ARUN PALLI ) parkash* JUDGE

¶28

Chand Parkash 2014.03.14 14:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Parteek Jain v. Director Food Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs Dpt & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parteek Jain v. Director Food Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs Dpt & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jarnail Singh Vs U.O.I. and Ors.

Union of India Vs Puneet Gosain & Ors.

Chandigarh Transport Undertaking Vs Ajit Singh etc.

Court on Its Own Motion Vs State of Punjab

Saroj Bala Vs Board of School Education Haryana

Gurmej Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.