Basheer, J.

The challenge in this writ Appeal is against blacklisting of appellant from undertaking any contract in the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation (for short "the Corporation").

2. Appellant was awarded a contract by the corporation for handling and transportation of food grains to the Sub Depot at Vellayil in Kozhikode for a period of two years commencing from 21.4.1997. Main two items of operation under the contract were cleaning of the food grains and filling the loose grains in gunnies. In the nature of the dispute that is to be resolved in this case, we are not referring to the various other details relating to the contract in question.

3. As mentioned earlier, the contract awarded to the appellant was initially for a period of two years starting from 21.4.1997. It is not in dispute that the contract was being renewed by the corporation from time to time at the same rates and on the same terms and conditions as indicated in Ext.P1. However, by Ext.P3 communication dated 23.3.2002 the Regional Manager of the corporation informed the appellant that the special audit party which conducted a detailed audit of accounts relating to cleaning and rebagging of the food grains undertaken at the sub depot, for the period from 26.5.1997 to 31.12.2000 had detected a lot of discrepancies and that the appellant was paid a sum of Rs. 2,57,361.55 on the basis of "bogus claims" made by him. Therefore, the appellant was directed to remit the above-mentioned sum of Rs.2,57,361.55 to the Corporation, being the cleaning and filling charges received by him fraudulently within seven days of receipt of Ext.P3 communication. In response to the above communication, the appellant submitted Exts.P4 and P5 representations, which, however, were not productive. Thereafter, the Corporation informed the appellant by its communication-dated 3.7.2002 (Ext.P6) that the above sum of Rs.2,57,361.55 would be recovered from the pending bills payable to him towards the handling and transporting charges. Later, appellant was informed that his request to reconsider the order for recovery cannot be entertained. Soon thereafter, by Ext.P8 order dated 6.8.2002 the Chairman and Managing Director of the Corporation "found" that the appellant had cheated the corporation to the tune of Rs.2,57,361.55 and consequently it was ordered that the appellant be blacklisted from undertaking any type of work in the corporation.

4. The appellant challenged the above orders/communications (Exts.P3, P6, P7and P8) issued by the corporation in the Original petition under Article 226 of the constitution. The learned Single Judge took the view that the order putting the appellant in the "blacklist" cannot be characterized as arbitrary. It was further held that the facts and circumstances of the case did not warrant that the corporation ought to have called for an explanation from the appellant before he was blacklisted. Consequently, the Original petition was dismissed. Hence, the Writ Appeal.

5. Shri K. Chandrasekharan, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that the order passed by the corporation putting the appellant in the blacklist without affording an opportunity to e heard, is against all cannons of law and the well settled principles of natural justice. The learned Senior Counsel invited our attention to the operative portion of the impugned order issued by the chairman and Managing Director of the Corporation which reads as follows:

"In the above circumstances I find that the Handling and Transporting Contractor M/s. Expert line Enterprises, 5/2848, Thuruthiyad, Puthiyara P.O., Kozhikode has cheated the Kerala state Civil supplies Corporation for an amount of Rs.2,57,361/55 (Rupees two lakhs fifty seven thousand three hundred sixty one and paise fifty five). Therefore I hereby order to blacklist M/s. Expert line Enterprises from undertaking any type of work in Kerala State Civil supplies Corporation."

6. The fact that the appellant was no