RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

1. The petition impugns the communication dated 18th May, 2015 of the respondent Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOC) blacklisting the petitioner for a period of three years therefrom.

2. Though the petition has been listed on several occasions but notice thereof has not been issued as yet. However, the counsel for the respondent IOC appears on advance notice.

3. It is not in dispute that the blacklisting is preceded by a show cause notice and a reply thereto by the petitioner and the impugned communication dated 18th May, 2015 states that after considering the reply, the proposal as contained in the show cause notice, of blacklisting the petitioner, had been confirmed.

4. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is twofold. Firstly, it is contended that though show cause notice was given but no opportunity of hearing was given and secondly it is contended that the impugned communication is without any reasons.

5. The counsel for the petitioner has handed over a compilation of the following judgments in support of her contentions:-

(i) M/s. Erusian Equipment & Chemicals Ltd. vs. State of West Bengal, (1975) 1 SCC 70;

(ii) Joseph Vilangandan vs. The Ex