IMPORTANT POINT
The court reaffirmed that blacklisting without a hearing violates principles of natural justice, requiring fair procedure in administrative actions.

ORDER:

Surepalli Nanda, J.

Heard Sri Rama Rao Kilaru, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Sri S.Bhoopal Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TSWREIS, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 3 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing on behalf of respondent No.2.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

“…to issue a writ order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that

a) action of the 2nd Respondent in issuing proceedings Rc.No. RCO/YDD/225/2024, dated 10.05.2024 keeping the Petitioner in blacklist for catering services for a period of 05 years and forfeiting the EMD payable to the Petitioner is illegal and arbitrary and therefore, the said proceedings are liable to be set aside.

b) further direct the 2nd Respondent to permit the Petitioner to participate in the Tender Notification issued in Rc.No. A1/DCO/Ydd-Bngr/2024-2025, dated 19.06.2024 for catering contract and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice”.

3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that, in pursuance of Tender Notification issued vide Rc.No.A1/DCO/YDDBNGR/2023-24, dated 20.05.2023, the petitioner submitted his tender and the said contract was awarded to him for the supply of catering material to the two institutions viz., TSWRCOE (B) and TSWRS/JC/G/Valigonda @ Bibinagar for the academic year, 2023-2024. While the petitioner contract was in existence, the Principal of the College has issued a memo dated 16.04.2024 to the petitioner stating that due to the petitioner’s un-cleanliness, the children was suffering with ill health. Immediately, the petitioner submitted his explanation to the said memo on 17.04.2024. While the matter stood thus, the Additional Collector/Chairman, D.P.C. Yadadri Bhonigir District issued proceedings Rc.No.RCO/ YDD/225/2024, dated 10.05.2024 cancelling the services of the petitioner for the remaining period of the year 2023-24 with immediate effect and the EMD amount of the catering contractor is forfeited and the petitioner’s catering services are blacklisted for five years. Aggrieved by the proceedings of the respondent No.2 dated 10.05.2024, the present writ petition is filed.

4. This Court vide its order dated 24.06.2024 in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in the present writ petition, passed interim orders in favour of the petitioner observing as under:

“Heard Mr.K.Rama Rao, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondents.

A bare perusal of the impugned proceedings vide Rc.No.RCO/YDD/225/2024, dated 10.05.2024 of the 2nd respondent indicates as borne on record that, the respondent No.2 had not issued any notice to the petitioner prior to passing of the impugned proceedings dated 10.05.2024.

Taking into consideration the fact as borne on record that the order impugned dated 10.05.2024 had been issued by 2nd respondent stating that catering services of the petitioner had been blacklisted for carrying out the said services for a period of five years and further the EMD, amount of the petitioner/contractor is forfeited with immediate effect, this Court opines that, order impugned dated 10.05.2024 issued by the 2nd respondent herein, is one which no reasonable person could have passed without providing reasonable opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner herein.

Few observations in the Judgments of the Apex Court with regard to “Blacklisting”.

(i) The Apex Court in its Judgment reported in 1975 (1) SCC Page 75 in “Erusian Equipment and Chemicals Ltd. v. State of West Bengal”, at paras 17 and 20 observed as under:

“17 …The activities of the Government have a public element and, therefore, there should be fairness and equality. The State need not enter into any contract with anyone but if it does so, it must do so fairly without discrimination and without unfair procedure. Reputation is a part of a person's