HON’BLE MRS JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE J. SREENI VAS RAO WRI T APPEAL No.549 OF 2025 ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Mrs Justice Surepalli Nanda)

Heard Sri A.Venkatesh, learned Senior Designated Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/ petitioner and the learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents.

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

“….to allow the appeal and set aside the order dated 01.05.2025 in W.P.No.11034 of 2025, passed by the Hon’ble Court and consequently allow the Writ Petition.

3. The relevant portion of the order impugned, dated 01.05.2025 passed in W.P.No.11034 of 2025 in particular para Nos.16 & 17 are extracted hereunder:-

16) in the instant case, the impugned order dated 28.03.2025 is passed blacklisting the petitioner’s Company for the lapses of deficit supply, delay in supply, late hours supply, supply not in working hours, rotten and small eggs (less than 45 grams), etc. however, without specifying the period of blacklisting, which in the considered view of this Court is too harsh for the alleged lapses and therefore needs to be interfered with.

17) For the aforementioned reasons, while confirming the action of the respondents in blacklisting the petitioner’s Company, the impugned order dated 28.03.2025 is set aside to the extent of not indicating the period of blacklisting and the matter is remanded to the authorities for taking appropriate decision on the period for which the petitioner’s Company is to be blacklisted duly considering the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Panda I nfra Projects (I ndia) Private Limited (referred supra) as well as the gravity of lapses on the part of the petitioner. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. Learned Senior Designated Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant mainly puts-forth the following submissions:-

i) The impugned order dated 01.05.2025 passed in W.P. No. 11034 of 2025 needs to be set aside on the ground that the appellant was not provided with an opportunity of personal hearing to put-forth the appellant’s case, before the 2^nd respondent prior to passing of the impugned order, dated 28.03.2025 by the 2^nd respondent and therefore, the present Writ Appeal needs to be allowed as prayed for.

ii) The appellant is entitled for being provided with a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing for deciding the subject issue on merits and hence, the relief as prayed for by the appellant/writ petitioner in W.P.No.11034 of 2024 needs to be granted in favour of the appellant/writ petitioner.

iii) Placing reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in “M/ s.Techno Prints Vs.Chhattisgarh Text Book Corporation and another” dated 12.02.2025 and also the judgment of this Court dated 24.3.2023 passed in W.P.No.518 of 2023 in support of appellant’s case, the learned senior designated counsel contends that the appellant/petitioner herein is entitled for the relief as prayed for in the present writ appeal. iv) The order impugned in W.P.No.11034 of 2025 passed by the 2^nd respondent, dated 28.03.2025 is unreasoned order passed in clear violation of principles of natural justice and hence, the order, dated 01.05.2025 passed in W.P.No.11034 of 2025 confirming the action of the respondents in blacklisting the petitioner’s company vide the said impugned order, dated

28.03.2025 of the 2^nd respondent has to be set-aside.

Based on the aforesaid submissions, the learned senior designated counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/ petitioner contends that the present Writ Appeal has to be allowed as prayed for.

5. The learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents mainly puts-forth the following submissions:-

i) Despite the issuance of six notices to the appellant herein, the appellant failed to furnish any explanation.

ii) Since the said notices clearly indicated that failure to submit a satisfactory expla