ORDER :

1. This case is taken up through video conferencing.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order as contained in letter no.03/ISSNIP/2019-2020/1860/Sa.Ka. dated 15.12.2021 passed by the Director, Social Welfare, Department of Women, Child Development and Social Security (Social Welfare Directorate), Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi- respondent no.2 whereby the petitioner has been blacklisted for a period of one year.

3. The factual background of the case, as stated in the writ petition, is that on 03.03.2020 the respondent no.2 floated a tender on Government e-marketplace (GeM), an Online portal to facilitate public procurement of goods and services required by government departments/organizations/public sector undertakings, under Bid no. GEM/2020/B/569317 for procurement of 29134 smartphones. The petitioner as well as five other companies participated in the said tender and finally the petitioner was declared L1 bidder to supply smartphones @ Rs.6,700/- (inclusive of GST) per unit; total cost of Rs.19.51 crores (approx.). The said tender was, however, subsequently cancelled. The respondent no.2 vide letter dated 20.08.2020 forwarded a complaint to the petitioner filed by an unknown person with respect to the documents submitted by it in the aforesaid tender. On receipt of the said letter, the petitioner submitted its reply on 22.08.2020 giving point wise response as sought by the said respondent. After lapse of more than one year i.e. on 23.08.2021, the respondents raised an online incident report on the GeM portal, alleging that the seller had submitted false declarations regarding certifications and availability of Toll Free number due to which they had to cancel the bid and the said procurement was delayed. Thereafter, the respondents escalated the incident on GeM portal on 20.09.2021. The administrator of GeM asked the petitioner to provide its comment on the said issue, which was duly provided by the petitioner on 20.09.2021, 11.10.2021 and 14.10.2021. On getting satisfied with the replies submitted by the petitioner, the complaint raised by the respondents was closed by the GeM portal without taking any action or making any adverse remark against it. Despite the said fact, the respondent no.2 passed the impugned order on 15.12.2021, blacklisting the petitioner for a period of one year. The petitioner immediately made objection to the said order vide letter dated 16.12.2021, but of no avail. Hence, the present writ petition.

4. Mr. Navneeti Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, as neither any show cause notice was served upon it nor opportunity of hearing was provided to it before passing the impugned order. Moreover, the same is also in the teeth of several judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as this Court and on this score alone, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. It has wrongly been observed in the impugned order that the petitioner did not give any comment or reply on the GeM portal, rather the petitioner had appropriately replied the queries raised on GeM portal subsequent to which the complaint was closed finding no fault on the part of the petitioner. It is also submitted that the respondent no.2 has neither discussed nor has referred the content of the reply to the queries filed by the petitioner on 22.08.2020 over a year prior to issuance of the impugned order. The allegations regarding false declaration and providing wrong toll free number as stated in the impugned order are ex-facie perverse and unsustainable. The model referred in the OEM Declarations, Technical Compliance and BIS certificates submitted along with the bid are same and not different. The petitioner offered Xolo Brand Model Name LN9910- 2GB, which is also called as Era4s_2GB (marketing name) along with the said certificates, declaring the same model number.