SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
P.B. BAJANTHRI, JITENDRA KUMAR, JJ.
Titu Badwal S/o Late Sohan Singh – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5076 of 2023
Decided On : 13-07-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Dhanendra Chaubey, Prabhat Ranjan.
For the Respondent: Vikas Kumar.

IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established is the requirement for specific notice and reasoned decision in cases of suspension or blacklisting under Rule 11 of the Bihar Contractors Registration Rules, 2007.

Headnote:

Suspension of Registration - Bihar Contractors Registration Rules, 2007 - Rule 11

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to quash the suspension of their registration under Rule 11 of the Bihar Contractors Registration Rules, 2007, for a period of three years. The court found the suspension order to be unreasoned and lacking specific notice, setting it aside and remanding the matter for a detailed speaking order.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the suspension order was unreasoned and lacked specific notice, thereby setting it aside and remanding the matter for a detailed speaking order.

Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of the suspension order under Rule 11 of the Bihar Contractors Registration Rules, 2007, and the requirement for specific notice and reasoned decision.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles established in the cases of Isolators and Isolators vs. Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ld. and Another, 2023 SCC Online SC 444 and UMC Technologies Private Limited vs. Food Corporation of India and Another, (2021) 2 SCC 551, emphasizing the need for specific notice and reasoned decision in cases of suspension or blacklisting.

Final Decision: The court set aside the suspension order and remanded the matter to the competent authority to issue specific notice, allow the petitioner to file a detailed explanation or objection, and pass a detailed speaking order within three months.

JUDGMENT :

P.B. BAJANTHRI, J.

1. Instant petition has been filed for following reliefs:

(A) For quashing the impugned order (Annexure-16) by which the Respondent Engineer-in-chief suspended the petitioner's Registration No. Class I No. 1190033 for 03 (three) Years from the date of the issuance of Suspension Order vide Letter No. 4778 (Bhawan) dated 24.08.2021 malafidely against the mandate of article 14 of the Constitution as well as in violation of the basic principle of Natural Justice i.e. without considering the show cause submitted by the petitioner.

(B) For quashing the Appellate order (Annexure-20) by which the Appellate Authority has upheld the impugned order (Annexure-16). The said order is mechanical, without application of mind against the Principle of Natural justice as well as against the material on record.

(C) For staying the operation of the impugned suspension order by which the Engineer-in-Chief has suspended the petitioner's Registration No. Class-1 1190033 for 03 (Three) years vide Letter No. 4778 (Bhawan) dated 24.8.2021 as well as the Appellate order dated 01.03.2023 uphold the impugned order during the pendency of the writ application.

(D) Any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled to.

2. The petitioner’s registration has been suspended in the light of Rule 11 of the Bihar Contractors Registration Rules, 2007. The petitioner had approached this Court on an earlier occasion as and when process of suspending his registration. This Court reserved the liberty to prefer appeal before the Appellate Authority and it was rejected.

3. In this backdrop, the petitioner has assailed the suspension of the registration for a period of three years.

4. It is necessary to reproduce Rule 11 of the Bihar Contractors Registration Rules, 2007, which reads as under:

11. Black-Listing and Suspension:

(a) Contractors registered in any of the classes shall be liable for black-listing or demotion to a lower class or suspension for a specified period if he personally or any partner of the firm or company, or any of its directors or employees or representatives indulges in any of the following malpractices:

(Underline supplied)

(i) Indisciplined behavior with any officer or employee of the concerned department.

(ii) Creating law and order problem in Government Office during receipt of tender papers, opening of tenders or any work related thereto.

(iii) Threatening or attacking any officer or employee of the department.

(iv) Participating in or boycotting tenders by forming a cartel.

(v) On failure to execute the agreement within the stipulated period after allotment of work if repeated on more than one occasion.

(vi) Failure to abide by conditions of Agreement and standing instructions therein during execution of work.

(vii) Subletting any work without consent of the department to another contractor or any other individual.

(viii) Selling Government material like Cement. Steel and Bitumen etc.

(ix) On submission of false or forged security as earnest money and forged documents.

(x) On being convicted for any criminal activity.

(xi) Submission of tender in such circle in which his close relative(s) is/are posted as divisional accountant or any officer not below the rank of junior engineer. Close relative means husband/wife /mother/father/ brother of sister.

(xii) In the event of a contractor being blacklisted by any other Government department.

(b) (i) If any person as mentioned in clause 11(a) of this rule indulges in any malpractice as described in sub clause (i) to (v) of 11 (a) then the registration of the concerned contractor may be demoted to a lower class permanently. If he indulges in more than one malpractice as described in sub-clause (i) to (v) of 11(a) then the concerned contractor may be blacklisted.

(ii) If any person as mentioned in clause 11(a) of this rule indulges in any malpractice as described in sub-clause (vi) to (xii) of 11(a) then the concerned contractor may be black-listed.

(c) Before black-listing or demoting o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top