The Allahabad High Court has ruled that no contracting firm can be blacklisted indefinitely no matter what irregularity it has committed.
The division Bench of Justice Shekhar B Saraf and Justice Vipin Chandra Dixit passed this order while hearing a petition filed by M/S M I Construction.
This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated December 29, 2023 debarring the petitioner for six months and a subsequent order dated January 1, 2024 modifying the earlier order and blacklisting the petitioner for an indefinite period.
As laid down by a Division Bench of the High Court in M/s Mohd Jeeshan Contractor and Suppliers Vs State of UP and 4 others, the Court has held as follows:-
“3. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has relied upon the judgement of the Supreme Court in Kulja Industries Limited v Chief General Manager, Western Telecom Project Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and Others reported in (2014) 14 SCC 731 and placed reliance on paragraph Nos.22, 25 and 28.2 thereof to buttress her argument that blacklisting of a firm by an authority would depend on several factors and the same cannot in any case be for an indefinite period.
She has further relied on a judgment of the Court in M/s Hi Tech Pipe Limited v State of UP and Others, Neutral Citation wherein a Division Bench of the Court has held that the entire concept of blacklisting of a firm is required to be seen in a holistic manner and what has to be appreciated is that an order of blacklisting of a particular firm is in the nature of punishment which carries with it civil consequences.
4. Keeping in view the judgements cited by the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, we are of the view that in the case, the respondent authorities have acted in an illegal and arbitrary manner by blacklisting the petitioner for an indefinite period. Such an order does not stand on any footing whatsoever and Court is duty bound to quash and set aside the same.”
In light of the above judgment, it is clear that blacklisting a petitioner for an indefinite period is against the law, the court observed.
Accordingly, the order of blacklisting and the earlier order of debarring are quashed and set-aside by the high court. The Court clarified that respondent authority shall be at liberty to issue a fresh show cause notice, if so advised and proceed in accordance with law.
With the above direction, the Court disposed of the petition.
The post appeared first on .
The division Bench of Justice Shekhar B Saraf and Justice Vipin Chandra Dixit passed this order while hearing a petition filed by M/S M I Construction.
This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated December 29, 2023 debarring the petitioner for six months and a subsequent order dated January 1, 2024 modifying the earlier order and blacklisting the petitioner for an indefinite period.
As laid down by a Division Bench of the High Court in M/s Mohd Jeeshan Contractor and Suppliers Vs State of UP and 4 others, the Court has held as follows:-
“3. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has relied upon the judgement of the Supreme Court in Kulja Industries Limited v Chief General Manager, Western Telecom Project Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and Others reported in (2014) 14 SCC 731 and placed reliance on paragraph Nos.22, 25 and 28.2 thereof to buttress her argument that blacklisting of a firm by an authority would depend on several factors and the same cannot in any case be for an indefinite period.
She has further relied on a judgment of the Court in M/s Hi Tech Pipe Limited v State of UP and Others, Neutral Citation wherein a Division Bench of the Court has held that the entire concept of blacklisting of a firm is required to be seen in a holistic manner and what has to be appreciated is that an order of blacklisting of a particular firm is in the nature of punishment which carries with it civil consequences.
4. Keeping in view the judgements cited by the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, we are of the view that in the case, the respondent authorities have acted in an illegal and arbitrary manner by blacklisting the petitioner for an indefinite period. Such an order does not stand on any footing whatsoever and Court is duty bound to quash and set aside the same.”
In light of the above judgment, it is clear that blacklisting a petitioner for an indefinite period is against the law, the court observed.
Accordingly, the order of blacklisting and the earlier order of debarring are quashed and set-aside by the high court. The Court clarified that respondent authority shall be at liberty to issue a fresh show cause notice, if so advised and proceed in accordance with law.
With the above direction, the Court disposed of the petition.
The post appeared first on .