Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
PARTHA SARTHY, ASHUTOSH KUMAR
Naveen Kumar Son of Lilanand Jha – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary Food and Consumer Protection Department, Government of Bihar, Patna – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing the parties' representations (Para 1) |
| 2. cancellation of the transport agreement and blacklisting (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. reissuance of notice for reconsideration (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. arguments regarding black-marketing allegations (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. consideration of evidence in the order (Para 10 , 11) |
| 6. justification for cancellation and penalties (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 7. no grounds for interference determined (Para 15) |
| 8. final dismissal of the application (Para 16) |
JUDGMENT :
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY)
1. Heard Mr. Rama Kant Sharma, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Rakesh Kumar Samrendra for the petitioner, Mr. Anjani Kumar, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh for the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Corporation’) and Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, learned counsel for the State of Bihar.
2. The petitioner has filed the instant writ application praying for quashing the order contained in Memo no.1841 dated 5.10.2024 whereby the respondents were pleased to cancel the agreement entered into between the Corporation and the petitioner, blacklisted the petitioner for a period of five years a
The authority must provide a reasoned decision based on substantial evidence before imposing penalties; procedural fairness is essential in administrative actions.
The power to blacklist a contractor is subject to judicial review and must be exercised in accordance with the principles of natural justice, proportionality, reasonableness, and fairness, especially....
Point of Law : Tender - Blacklisting - Order of blacklisting has an effect of depriving a person of equality of opportunity in the matter of public contract.
Blacklisting in public contracts requires compelling evidence of misconduct; mere disputes over contract terms do not justify severe penalties.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of fair play, natural justice, non-discrimination, equality, reasonableness, and proportionality in the process of blacklisting, and the need for a valid, parti....
Indefinite blacklisting without defined duration and proper procedural fairness is arbitrary, violating natural justice principles and requiring a clear basis for such action.
A party cannot be blacklisted without a clear and adequate show cause notice, violating principles of natural justice, leading to severe consequences.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
