The Building Construction Department had the authority to take actions against the petitioner under the Bihar Contractors Registration Rules, 2007, and had rightly blacklisted the petitioner for submitting forged documents.

ORDER :

Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.

1. Heard Mr. Umesh Prasad Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Tej Bahadur Singh, learned senior counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. Uday Shankar Sharan Singh, learned G.P. 19 for respondent No. 5.

2. The petitioner by filing this writ petition seeks following reliefs:-

(i) To issue a rule NISI in the nature of a writ of certiorari to quash and cancel the Communication dated 12.1.2019 issued by respondent No. 2 to respondent No. 5 as also the letter dated 3rd April, 2019 issued under the signature of the Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner-cum-Special Secretary, Building Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna (respondent No. 5) by which he called upon the petitioner to file a show cause in regard to the allegations made in the aforesaid letter being without authority of law;

(ii) To issue a writ in the nature of writ of certiorari to quash and cancel the order as contained in Memo No. Building/Blacklisting/05/2019/6851/Bhawan dated 26.7.2019 by which the registration No. BCD First (Personnel)-29 (Building)/2014 of the petitioner as contractor with the Building Construction Department, Government of Bihar, has been suspended and the petitioner has been blacklisted for 5 years;

(iii) To issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to refrain from giving effect of the order as contained in letter dated 24th/26th July, 2019 issued under the signature of the Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner-cum-Special Secretary, Building Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

(iv) To issue other appropriate writ/writs, order or orders, direction or directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.

3. The facts, in brief, for disposal of the case are that the petitioner though not a registered contractor with the Bihar State Building Construction Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) participated in pursuance of e-Tender being e-Tender No. 96/2018-19 for construction of Civil Court Building at Paliganj as detailed in Item No. 19 of the said e-Tender of which the bill of quantity was valued at Rs. 21,14,51,242/-. The petitioner was required to deposit earnest money of Rs. 31,20,000/- and the petitioner deposited vide Fixed Deposit Receipt dated 20th November, 2018 issued by the Bank of India, Patel Nagar Branch, Patna. The petitioner had also submitted e-Tender for construction of Gymnasium near the registered office of respondent No. 1 fully described in Item No. 16 of the e-Tender of which the bill of quantity was valued at Rs. 8,25,06,457/-. The petitioner deposited the earnest money of Rs. 16,50,000/- by Fixed Deposit Receipt dated 20.11.2018 issued by the Bank of India, Patel Nagar Branch, Patna. As per the terms and conditions of the e-Tender, the petitioner had to comply with the requirements as mentioned.

4. The case of the petitioner is that by mistake, the representative of the petitioner uploaded experience certificate with the documents filed in pursuance of e-Tender but when the petitioner came to know the mistake, withdrew both the tenders much before opening of the bid and the petitioner did not participate in bidding process. The petitioner had already withdrawn himself as a bidder. Nevertheless, the Tender Committee of respondent No. 1 by order dated 4th January, 2019 forfeited the security amount in respect of tenders on the same ground that the petitioner had enclosed the certificate of experience, which was forged and fabricated and thus the petitioner had concealed the material facts and applied for two works detailed in aforesaid e-Tenders.

5. Further case of the petitioner is that the earnest money deposited by the petitioner was forfeited as per the order of the Tender Committee of respondent No. 1 although there was no concluded contract between the parties. The petitioner filed CWJC No. 1543 of 2019 and CWJC No. 2237 of 2019 against the order for