IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SANJAY KAROL, PARTHA SARTHY, JJ.
Abha Chaudhary, Proprietor of the Firms Ganpati Drugs – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Health Dept, Govt. of Bihar, Patna – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20505 of 2021
Decided on : 03-01-2023
Blacklisting - Writ of Certiorari and Mandamus - The court quashed the order blacklisting the petitioner, citing violation of principles of natural justice and absence of proof of notice to show cause. The petitioner was directed to cooperate in the proceedings, and the respondent was instructed to pass a fresh order with reasons within two weeks.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the order blacklisting their firm for five years, citing absence of proof of notice to show cause and violation of principles of natural justice.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the impugned order needed to be quashed due to absence of proof of notice to show cause and violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner was directed to cooperate in the proceedings, and the respondent was instructed to pass a fresh order with reasons within two weeks.
Issues: Violation of principles of natural justice, absence of proof of notice to show cause, and civil and penal consequences of blacklisting.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the order blacklisting the petitioner was to be quashed due to absence of proof of notice to show cause and violation of principles of natural justice.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the impugned order was quashed. The petitioner was directed to cooperate in the proceedings, and the respondent was instructed to pass a fresh order with reasons within two weeks.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the impugned order dated 09.11.2021, passed by respondent no.4, namely the Superintendent, Nalanda Medical College and Hospital, Patna, (Annexure-18, page 46) needs to be quashed, for even though the respondents alleged to have issued notice to show cause and the petitioner to have responded thereto, but however, in the absence of any proof thereof and non-reference of such fact in the impugned order and the specific averments made by the petitioner in paragraph no. 28 of the petition to the effect that he was never issued any show cause notice, we quash and set aside the order dated 09.11.2021, passed by respondent no.4, namely the Superintendent, Nalanda Medical College and Hospital, Patna, (Annexure-18, page 46), whereby the petitioner stands blacklisted for a period of five years.
4. The order blacklisting the petitioner entails civil and penal consequences. Also, there is violation of principles of natural justice.
5. As such, the petition is allowed with the following mutually agreeable directions:-
(b) Petitioner shall make himself available in the office of Respondent No. 4, namely, the Superintendent, Nalanda Medical College and Hospital, Patna on 16th of January, 2023 at 10:30 A.M., when a date shall be fixed enabling the petitioner to present his case;
(c) The petitioner shall fully cooperate in the proceedings;
(d) After affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, a fresh order, assigning reasons, shall be passed by the said officer within a period of two weeks thereafter;
(e) The order assigning reasons shall be communicated to the petitioner;
(f) Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to such alternative remedies as are otherwise available in accordance with law;
(g) We are hopeful that as and when petitioner takes recourse to such remedies, as are otherwise available in law, before the appropriate forum, the same shall be dealt with, in accordance with law and with reasonable dispatch;
(h) Also, liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the Court, should the need so arise subsequently on the same and subsequent cause of action.
6. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
Violation of principles of natural justice and absence of proof of notice to show cause can lead to the quashing of an order.
The lack of procedural fairness, including the absence of proof of notice to show cause, can lead to the quashing of administrative orders with civil and penal consequences.
Indefinite blacklisting without defined duration and proper procedural fairness is arbitrary, violating natural justice principles and requiring a clear basis for such action.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for fairness, relevance, natural justice, non-discrimination, equality, reasonableness, and proportionality in blacklisting decisio....
Point of law : Before proposing to pass a black listing order or debarring orders the parties had to be given hearing followed by an appropriate reasoned order.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a fair hearing, specific show cause notices, and proportionate punishment before imposing blacklisting in government contracts.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.