JUDGMENT

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J. - This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India whereby and whereunder the order as contained in Memo No.429 dated 18.04.2013 passed by the Municipal Corporation, Dhanbad by which the petitioner has been blacklisted for indefinite period without any notice and as such this writ petition has been filed.

2. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner is that he had participated in the bid in pursuance to the notice inviting tender being NIT No.03/2010-11 which was floated by Dhanbad Municipal Corporation, Dhanbad for construction of one Black Top Road from Sri B.N. Singh Hotel, Tetulmari towards West, Munidih under group-C in which he has been declared to be successful and accordingly letter of allotment has been issued on 05.03.2011.

3. The terms and conditions of the contract was that the work was to be completed within a period of three months i.e., from 23.03.2011 and to be completed up to 22.06.2011 as per the agreement entered into in between the petitioner and the competent authority vide agreement No.20F2/2010-11 but the work could not have been completed since the DO Letter has not been issued for purchasing Bitumen from the authorized dealer which is the requirement to get the Bitumen as would be evident from communication dated 18.11.2011 (Annexure-4) issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Dhanbad Municipal Corporation, Dhanbad requesting therein to supply the Bitumen which is to be used in the Government work but even then the Bitumen has not been supplied, thereafter, the agreement was rescinded and allotted in favour of the other bidder who has completed the work but the authority taking this as an irregularity has passed the order of blacklisting for indefinite period vide impugned order, therefore, the instant writ petition interalia, is on the ground that the blacklisting for indefinite period cannot said to be commensurate with the irregularity committed and that too when there is no antecedent of the petitioner of not completing the other works floated by the respondent-Corporation.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon''ble Apex Court in the case of Kulja Industries Limited vs. Chief General Manager, Western Telecom Project Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and Ors., (2014) 14 SCC 731 wherein according to him, dealing with the situation of blacklisting the suppliers/contractors in case of commission of act of omission and commission or frauds, debarment for permanent period is not proper.

4. Mr. Mahavir Prasad Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the Dhanbad Municipal Corporation has submitted by placing reliance upon the counter affidavit wherein interalia it has been stated that the petitioner was allotted the said work and was to execute the work in pursuance to the terms and conditions of the agreement being Agreement No.20F2/2010-11 as per which he was to complete the work within a period of three months to be commenced from 23.03.2011 but he has failed to even initiate the work, therefore, causing inconvenience to the people at large and after expiry of the stipulated period as per the agreement the same was rescinded and allotted in favour of the other bidder who ultimately executed the work, therefore, omission and commission of the petitioner is serious in nature affecting the interest of the people at large, considering that aspect of the matter, the authorities have come out with a decision to blacklist the petitioner forever, hence, the same suffers from no infirmity.

So far as the ground taken by the petitioner that no show cause notice has been issued, the same has been disputed by making statement supported by documents that sufficient opportunity was given which has been responded by the petitioner, therefore, it is not a case where there is violation of principles of natural justice, hence, in view of the factual aspect, the impugned order needs no interference.

5. Having heard the learned counsel f