SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 1199

PATNA HIGH COURT
Yaduvansham Infrastructure Private Limited
CWJC-365/2026



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.365 of 2026

======================================================

Yaduvansham Infrastructure Private Limited, through its Managing Director

Alok Raj, Gender-Male, aged about -31 years, Son of Ram Pravesh Yadav,

Resident of Ward No. -4, Shir Sai Complex, Gaushala Road, P.S.-Chitragupta

Nagar, District and Town-Khagaria, Pin-851204.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Old Secretariat, Patna.

2. The Secretary, Rural Works Department, Visheweshraiya Bhawan, Bailey

Road, Patna.

3. The Engineer-in-Chief, Rural Works Department, Visheweshraiya Bhawan,

Bailey Road, Patna.

4. The Chief Engineer-4, Rural Works Department, Purnea.

5. The Superintending Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Circle,

Saharsa.

6. The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division,

Khagaria.

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Lal Babu Singh, Advocate

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Pratik Kumar, AC to GA 11

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY

ORAL ORDER

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)

2 30-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The following reliefs have been sought in the

present writ application:

“(i) For quashing of the Reasoned Order No. 10025

(contained in Memo No. 10025) dated 18-09-2025

passed by the Respondent Engineer-In-Chief (Annexure

P/5) whereby the petitioner has been blacklisted for a

period of two years under Clause 11(ka) (ix) and (kha)

(ii) of the Notification No. 8123 dated 19-12-2007 of the

Rural works Department, Bihar.

##PAGE2##

Patna High Court CWJC No.365 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026

2/4

(ii) For quashing of the Appellate order dated

05.12.2025 (contained in Memo No. 12403 dated 10-

12-2025) (Annexure P/7) whereby the Respondent

Secretary has dismissed the appeal preferred by the

petitioner and affirmed the order of blacklisting dated

18.09.2025 contained in Reasoned Order No. 10025.

(iii) For a direction to the Respondents not to act upon

the order of the blacklisting dated 18.09.2025 contained

in Reasoned Order No. 10025 and the appellate order

dated 05.12.2025 contained in Memo No. 12403.

(iv) For appropriate declarations that -

a) The impugned order of blacklisting dated 18.09.2025

and the Appellate order dated 05-12-2025 are violative

of principles of natural justice and fair play.

(b) The impugned appellate Order dated 05-12-2025 is

highly discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the

Constitution of India as the same Respondent Secretary

has set aside or reduced the period of the blacklisting

for period of only few months with respect to other

contractors on the same allegation/charge.

(v) For a direction to the respondents to allow the

petitioner in participating in the future tender during

pendency of the present writ application.

(vi) For any other relief(s) or consequential reliefs) to

which the petitioner may be found entitled to in the facts

and circumstances of this case.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

order of blacklisting has been passed without affording any

opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is further submitted

that in cases of other contractors, arising out of similar facts and

circumstances, the Appellate Authority has either set aside the

orders of blacklisting or reduced the period thereof. The said

orders have been brought on record as Annexure-P/8 series.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner's case

deserves consideration on the principle of parity and that the

##PAGE3##

Patna High Court CWJC No.365 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026

3/4

period of blacklisting may accordingly be reduced.

4. From a perusal of the order under challenge dated

18.09.2025 and the appellate order dated 05.12.2025, it appears

that the petitioner has been blacklisted for a period of two years

on the ground that the experience cert

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top