Blacklisting orders cannot be permanent in nature and must be for a reasonable period, as established by various judgments cited by the court.

JUDGMENT

Prateek Jalan, J. (Oral)

1. By order dated 13.12.2022, the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner was recorded as follows:

"1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that disputes have arisen between the parties in relation to the parking contracts for the two sites at Bhagwan Mahavir Marg, Vasank Kunj, New Delhi and Uphar Cinema, Green Park, New Delhi and on this account, the petitioner has been blacklisted by the respondents for an indefinite period.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that outstanding dues with respect to the parking site at Bhagwan Mahavir Marg, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi stands paid and in this regard, reference is made to the `amended Speaking Order' dated 19.12.2018 passed by the respondent(s). He further submits that insofar as dues for the parking site at Uphar Cinema, Green Park, New Delhi are concerned, a suit for recovery has been filed by the respondent(s). He, on instructions, submits that the prayer made in the present petition is now confined only to the indefinite period of blacklisting and in this regard has relied on the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in Vetindia Pharmaceuticals Limited v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., reported as (2021)1 SCC 804, M/s Chauhan Builders Raibareli v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., reported as SLP (C) No. 32840/2018 as well as a judgment passed by this Court in M/s MI2C Security Facilities Pvt. Ltd. V. North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors., reported as MANU/DE/1262/2021."

2. I have heard Mr. Praveen K. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Ms. Aakanksha Kaul, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Municipal Corporation of Delhi ["MCD"].

3. As recorded in the order dated 13.12.2022, as far as monetary dues of the petitioner are concerned, in respect of one parking site, the dues have already been satisfied and, in respect of the other parking site, MCD has filed a suit for recovery.

4. The only remaining issue is therefore with regard to the order of the respondent blacklisting the petitioner. The impugned cancellation order dated 28.03.2015 purports to cancel the parking site allotted to the petitioner on the ground of pending dues, and to blacklist it from the panel of registered parking contractors. An amended speaking order dated 19.12.2018, which has been placed on record by the respondents, reiterates the contents of the aforementioned cancellation order dated 28.03.2015 and states that a civil suit has already been filed for recovery. However, neither in the order dated 28.03.2015, nor in the amended speaking order, has any time limit been fixed for blacklisting. Mr. Chauhan submits that such indefinite orders of blacklisting are legally impermissible.

5. The Supreme Court, in Kulja Industries Ltd. v. Western Telecom Project BSNL & Ors., (2014)14 SCC 731, while remanding the matter for fresh determination, observed as follows:

"25. Suffice it to say that "debarment" is recognised and often used as an effective method for disciplining deviant suppliers/contractors who may have committed acts of omission and commission or frauds including misrepresentations, falsification of records and other breaches of the regulations under which such contracts were allotted. What is notable is that the "debarment" is never permanent and the period of debarment would invariably depend upon the nature of the offence committed by the erring contractor.

Emphasis supplied."

6. In Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd. & Anr. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., (2020)18 SCC 550, the Court set aside an indefinite directive barring purchase from a specific supplier as the debarment order "was made over 4 years and 2 months ago".¹[Paragraph 17.]

7. Daffodills Pharmaceuticals²[Supra [note 3].] was followed in Vetindia Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs State of UP & Anr., (2021)1 SCC 804, relied upon by Mr. Chauhan. The Court set aside an order of blacklisting due to long passage of time since the blacklisting order was p