IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RAJESH SHANKAR, J.
M/s. Sai Traders, a proprietorship concern through its sole Proprietor Smt. Shobha Pandey - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Prison & Disaster Management and Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 4304 of 2020
Decided On : 20-03-2023
Blacklisting - Quashing of Office Order - 2274 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the principles of natural justice and proportionality in the context of blacklisting/debarment. It referred to judgments such as Kulja Industries Limited Vs. Chief General Manager, Erusian Equipment & Chemicals Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal, Gorkha Security Services Vs. Government (NCT of Delhi), and UMC Technologies Private Limited Vs. Food Corporation of India. The court emphasized the importance of a valid, particularized, and unambiguous show-cause notice before blacklisting, and the need for fair hearing and proportionate decision-making. The court quashed the impugned Office Order and the consequential letter, citing violations of the principles of natural justice and procedural irregularities.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a food supplier, was blacklisted for five years by the Inspector General of Prison, Government of Jharkhand, Department of Home, Prison & Disaster Management, Ranchi, and debarred from supplying materials to Divisional Jail, Lohardaga. The petitioner argued that the blacklisting was arbitrary, disproportionate, and violated the principles of natural justice.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the blacklisting order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and procedural irregularities. It emphasized the importance of a valid, particularized, and unambiguous show-cause notice before blacklisting, and the need for fair hearing and proportionate decision-making.
Issues: Violation of principles of natural justice, proportionality of the blacklisting decision, procedural irregularities in the show cause notices.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the violation of principles of natural justice, procedural irregularities in the show cause notices, and the lack of proportionate decision-making in the blacklisting process.
Final Decision: The impugned Office Order and the consequential letter were quashed and set aside. The court did not remand the matter to the concerned respondent for passing a fresh order, considering the petitioner had already suffered for more than two years after the passing of the impugned order.
ORDER :
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the Office Order as contained in memo no. 2274 dated 04.11.2020 (Annexure-11 to the writ petition) issued under the signature of the respondent no. 2 – the Inspector General of Prison, Government of Jharkhand, Department of Home, Prison & Disaster Management, Ranchi, whereby the petitioner has been blacklisted for five years. Further prayer has been made for quashing letter no. 964 dated 05.11.2020 (Annexure-11/1 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent no. 4 – the Superintendent of Jail, Divisional Jail, Lohardaga, whereby in pursuance of the said office order, the petitioner has been debarred from supplying any food material in the Divisional Jail, Lohardaga with immediate effect against the work allotted to it for the fourth quarterly period of contract i.e., 01.10.2020 to 31.12.2020.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had participated in the tender floated by the respondent no. 4 and being the L-1 bidder, it was allotted the work of supplying food materials at Lohardaga Jail as an annual contract for a period from 01.04.2019 to 31.03.2020. The petitioner duly supplied the food materials in terms with the contract without any complaint from the respondent authorities. When the entire country was facing lockdown owing to COVID-19 pandemic, the petitioner received informal direction from the respondent no. 4 in the month of April 2020 for supplying food materials in Lohardaga Jail, which was replied by the petitioner vide letters dated 25.04.2020 and 28.04.2020 showing its inability to supply some of the food items such as mutton, fruits etc. since the concerned area was under lockdown. The petitioner also stated in the said letter that its previous annual contract for the period from 01.04.2019 to 31.03.2020 as well as quarterly contract for the period from 01.01.2020 to 31.03.2020, had already expired and were neither extended nor allotted afresh through any tender process. Thereafter, the respondent no. 4 vide letter no. 531 dated 20.05.2020 informed the respondent no. 2 that the petitioner had shown its inability to supply food materials and other items as were required for the inmates of the Divisional Jail, Lohardaga and recommended initiation of appropriate penal proceeding against it. During this period, the petitioner on several informal directions of respondent no. 4, somehow managed to procure about 900 Kgs. of flour (Aata) on 20.05.2020 and supplied it to Lohardaga Jail without there being any contract. In the month of May 2020, the respondent no. 4 directed the petitioner to supply mutton in Lohardaga Jail without any contract or issuing any tender notice and due to unavailability of the said item in the market during lockdown period, the petitioner expressed its inability to supply the same. The respondent no. 4 created pressure on the petitioner’s proprietor for supplying food materials and other items against which she represented the respondent no. 2 vide letter dated 21.05.2020 sent through e-mail dated 22.5.2020. Thereafter, the petitioner received show cause notice dated 26.05.2020 and reminder show cause notice dated 11.6.2020, both issued under the signature of respondent no. 3 – the Assistant Inspector General of Prison, Government of Jharkhand, Department of Home, Prison & Disaster Management, Ranchi asking it to give explanation with evidence on the allegation that the food materials were not being supplied to Lohardaga Jail administration. The petitioner filed its detailed reply on 12.06.2020 sent through e-mail dated 13.06.2020 explaining that its earlier contractual obligations under annual as well as quarterly contracts had already ended on 31.03.2020 and thereafter during the period of lockdown, on the verbal direction of the respondent no. 4, it tried its best to procure most of the required food materials and supplied the same to the Divisional Jail, Lohardaga, however, it was quite difficult for t
Kulja Industries Limited Vs. Chief General Manager
Erusian Equipment & Chemicals Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Gorkha Security Services Vs. Government (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
UMC Technologies Private Limited Vs. Food Corporation of India & Anr.
Nasir Ahmad v. Custodian General, Evacuee Property
Vetindia Pharmaceuticals Limited Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of a valid, particularized, and unambiguous show-cause notice before blacklisting, and the need for fair hearing and proportionate ....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of fair play, natural justice, non-discrimination, equality, reasonableness, and proportionality in the process of blacklisting, and the need for a valid, parti....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a fair hearing, specific show cause notices, and proportionate punishment before imposing blacklisting in government contracts.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.