JUDGMENT

1. Heard Mr. Y.V. Giri, the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners/company and Mr. Lalit Kishore, learned Senior Advocate for the Bihar Urban Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.

2. The respondent No. 2/Bihar Urban Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (in short the BUIDCO) had selected the petitioners/company for renovation, rehabilitation and conservation of Motijheel and its maintenance and upkeep for twelve months.

3. The aforesaid agreement stands cancelled by the order impugned and the petitioners/company has been blacklisted. The petitioners/company has also been slapped with a threat that the bank guarantee shall be encashed.

4. Mr. Y.V. Giri, the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners/company has submitted that the show-cause reply given to the BUIDCO has not at all been considered. It has been urged on their behalf that the design of the work had to be provided by the BUIDCO, which had never been supplied. On the contrary, the petitioners/company was asked to supply the model for the BUIDCO to decide about the methodology for cleaning/de-weeding the lake in question. It has also been submitted that there was a valid reason for not commissioning