ORDER :

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J

1. This writ appeal is directed against impugned order dated 29.04.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge by which the writ petition filed by the respondent No.1 herein has been allowed and the order of blacklisting dated 26.10.2018 has been quashed.

2. The writ petitioner/respondent No.1 herein filed writ petition seeking quashment of order dated 26.10.2018 blacklisting him for the period of 5 years from the date of order, alleging that the copy of CBI report on which the order of blacklisting has been based was not supplied to him despite having been demanded by application dated 26.07.2018. Furthermore, show cause notice was issued to the writ petitioner with predetermination and opinion has already been formed to blacklist him and, therefore, it was a mere formality to issue show cause, as such, order of blacklisting was liable to be set aside. The said petition was opposed by the writ appellant herein that the order of blacklisting has been passed strictly in accordance with law.

3. Learned Single Judge, allowed the writ petition by setting aside the order dated 26.10.2018 by which the writ petitioner was blacklisted holding that the CBI report, which was the basis of the blacklisting of the writ petitioner was never served to the writ petitioner and the Food Corporation of India (for short “FCI”) was predetermined to blacklist the writ petitioner-union on the date of serving show cause notice to him. The aforesaid order of blacklisting has been called in question.

4. Mr. B.P. Gupta, counsel for the appellant/FCI, would submit that the learned Single Judge was absolutely unjustified in quashing the order of blacklisting by recording a finding which is perverse to the record as the CBI report dated 16.12.2017 was against the writ petitioner and was a confidential document and while issuing the show cause notice, FCI was not predetermined to blacklist the writ petitioner and, therefore, the writ appeal deserves to be allowed.

5. Mr. Vikram Sharma, learned counsel for the writ petitioner/respondent No.1 herein, would support the impugned order and submit that the learned Single Judge was absolutely justified in setting aside the order of blacklisting as FCI has already formed its opinion by pre-deciding the issue while issuing the show cause notice and secondly, the CBI report dated 16.12.2017 which was the basis for impugned order was never served to the writ petitioner despite it was demanded by application dated 26.07.2018, as such, writ appeal deserves to be dismissed.

6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records with utmost circumspection.

7. It is not in dispute that respondent No.1, which is a registered trade union, was awarded contract by FCI for the period from 01.10.2010 to 30.09.2012 to handle the goods for transportation at Mahasamund by appointment letter dated 02.07.2010 issued by FCI Regional Office Raipur. The FCI issued show cause notice dated 12.07.2018 relying upon the report of CBI dated 16.12.2017 and recommended the writ petitioner to be blacklisted to which the writ petitioner vide memo dated 26.07.2018 demanded a copy of CBI report dated 16.12.2017 to file appropriate reply to show cause, but it was not supplied to him and ultimately by order dated 26.10.2018 respondent No.1 has been black listed. It is the case of respondent No.1 that appellant FCI has already formed its opinion to black list the petitioner union while issuing show cause notice that is the reason that the contents of the show cause notice and the order of black listing are same rather order of black listing is verbatim reproduction of the contents of the show cause notice.

8. At this stage, it would be appropriate to notice the contents of the show cause notice, which states as under:-

Notice

Whereas, M/s Chhattisgarh Gadiwan Reza Mazdoor Mahasangh Mahasamund was appointed as RH-H&T Contractor at Mahasamund for the period of two