1. This intra court appeal is directed against order dated 21.5.14 of the learned Single Judge of this court, whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant questioning the legality of order dated 27.11.12 passed by the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department (PWD), Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, the second respondent herein, blacklisting the appellant in terms of Para VIII.4 of Section VIII-Standard Code of Appendix XVI Part-II of Public Works Financial and Account Rules ('Rules'), stands dismissed.

2. The relevant facts in nutshell are that the appellant, a proprietorship concern, was conferred the status of 'AA' Class Contractor by the PWD vide order dated 31.7.09. According to the appellant, fourth respondent while working as Executive Engineer, PWD, Dungarpur, withheld the bills of the appellant concern and called its proprietor to his residence with ulterior motive to extract illegal gratification. The proprietor of the appellant concern visited residence of the fourth respondent but refused to accede to the undue demand and thereupon an FIR was lodged by the fourth respondent against the proprietor of the appellant concern and two others at Police Station, Kotwali, Dungarpur, alleging commission of offences under Sections 452, 427/34 of Indian Penal Code,1898 read with Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ( for short “SC/ST Act”) and Section 3/25 of Arms Act. The proprietor of the appellant concern, challenging the FIR, filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 2763/12 before this court, wherein in the first instance, while issuing the notices to the respondents, interim protection was granted to the proprietor of the appellant concern, however, later, the petition was dismissed vide order dated 18.2.13 and thereafter, the police has already filed a charge sheet against the proprietor of the appellant concern for offences under Sections 452, 427/34 IPC read with Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act and 3/25 of Arms Act.

3. At the same time, when the matter was reported by the fourth respondent to the higher authorities, a notice dated 1.11.12, was issued by the Chief Engineer, PWD, Jaipur, the second respondent herein, to the appellant to show cause as to why it may not be blacklisted. According to the appellant, the notice was responded to by it by way of a detailed reply but the second respondent proceeded to pass an order dated 27.11.12 blacklisting the appellant concern, without considering the reply filed, the legality whereof was challenged by the appellant by way of writ petition before this court.

4. The petition was contested by the respondents, taking the stand that the appellant failed to perform the maintenance work in defect liability period, attempted to raise the bill for the work never done and threatened the fourth respondent to clear the bills and also fired on him. According to the respondents the appellant concern has consistently misbehaved with the officers of the Department. In this regard, the respondents placed on record the recommendations made by the District Collector, Dungarpur, to blacklist the appellant as also the complaint made by an LDC of PWD Sub Division, Sagwara, wherein he has averred threat perception from the appellant concern to him and his family. Precisely, the stand of the respondents was that the appellant was guilty of misbehavior with the fourth respondent and causing damage to the public property and despite notice being issued, did not respond to the allegations levelled within stipulated period and therefore, the order passed by the competent authority cannot be faulted with.

5. The fourth respondent by way of an affidavit averred that the proprietor of the appellant concern is in habit of threatening the Government officials. In support of the allegations, the complaints made by the Government officials regarding the undue pressure and threatening given and the correspondence made pursuant thereto were