Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
M/s Excel Sports International - Appellant
Versus
North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr. - Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 5784 of 2021
Decided On : 03-06-2021
Blacklisting - Tender Work - The court set aside the impugned order of blacklisting and show cause notice, reserving the right of the respondent to issue a fresh show cause notice in accordance with the law. The petitioner was directed to file a response to the show cause notice within one week, and the respondent was given the liberty to pass a fresh order after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner impugned an order blacklisting them from participating in any tender work of SDMC, contending that no show cause notice specifically stating the proposed action of blacklisting was given to them.
Finding of the Court:
The court set aside the impugned order and show cause notice, reserving the right of the respondent to issue a fresh show cause notice. The petitioner was directed to file a response to the show cause notice within one week, and the respondent was given the liberty to pass a fresh order after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.
Issues: The issues revolved around the lack of a specific show cause notice regarding the proposed action of blacklisting and the procedural fairness in the blacklisting process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of providing a specific show cause notice before taking action such as blacklisting and upheld the principles of procedural fairness by setting aside the impugned order and show cause notice.
Final Decision: The impugned order of blacklisting and show cause notice were set aside, reserving the right of the respondent to issue a fresh show cause notice. The petitioner was directed to file a response to the show cause notice within one week, and the respondent was given the liberty to pass a fresh order after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. -
Cm APPLN. 18137-38/2021 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
W.P.(C) 5784/2021 & CM APPLN. 18136/2021 (stay)
2. Petitioner impugns order dated 31.03.2021 (allegedly received on 22.05.2021) whereby petitioner has been blacklisted for a period of one year from participating in any tender work of SDMC.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter-alia, contends that prior to issuance of the subject order no show cause notice was given to the petitioner, putting the petitioner to notice that a possible action of blacklisting is proposed against the petitioner. It is contended that a notice dated 01.12.2020 was issued, however, the notice did not specifically state that an action of blacklisting was proposed against the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-SDMC appearing on advance notice, on instructions of Mr. Sanjay Hingorani, Executive Engineer, Sanitary Land Fields (SLF), submits that without prejudice to the rights and contentions, impugned order dated 31.03.2021 as well as show cause notice dated 01.12.2020 be deemed to have been withdrawn, reserving the right of the Respondent to issue fresh show cause notice.
5. In view of the above, impugned order dated 31.03.2021 and show cause notice dated 01.12.2020 are set aside reserving the right of the respondent to issue a fresh show cause notice in accordance with law.
6. On receipt of the show cause notice, petitioner shall file a response thereto within one week. Thereafter respondent shall be at liberty to pass a fresh order after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Keeping in view the present prevailing situation, personal hearing may be granted over video conferencing.
7. All rights and contentions of parties are reserved.
8. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.
9. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through email by the Court Master.
Procedural fairness and the requirement of a specific show cause notice before taking action such as blacklisting.
The court reaffirmed the requirement of notice and opportunity for a hearing before punitive actions such as blacklisting can be imposed, upholding the principles of natural justice.
The court emphasized the importance of providing a clear and proper opportunity to the party being blacklisted to explain and take remedial measures before being debarred or blacklisted.
The court emphasized the need for strict observance of the principles of natural justice before passing an order of blacklisting and highlighted the requirement of a valid, particularised, and unambi....
A valid blacklisting order requires clear communication of intent and grounds, ensuring the affected party's right to a fair opportunity to respond.
The severity of the effects of blacklisting and the resultant need for strict observance of the principles of natural justice before passing an order of blacklisting.
The requirement for a fair hearing and a specific show cause notice before imposing the severe civil consequence of blacklisting, and the need for the authority to determine the period of punishment ....
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
