M/S Namrata Taders Constructions ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 8670 MP

                                                                         1
                                        IN    THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                             AT JABALPUR
                                                                  BEFORE
                                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                                             ON THE 14 th OF JUNE, 2023
                                                         WRIT PETITION No. 11387 of 2023

                                       BETWEEN:-
                                       M/S    NAMRATA      TADERS   CONSTRUCTIONS
                                       PAHADIKHERA ROAD MAJHGAWAN CHITRAKOOT
                                       SATNA MP THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR NAMRATA
                                       SINGH W/O SHIR SHER BAHADUR SINGH AGE ABOUT
                                       45 YEARS OCC. CONTRACTOR R/O PAHADIKHERA
                                       ROAD MAJHAGWAN CHITRAKOOT SATNA (MADHYA
                                       PRADESH)

                                                                                                     .....PETITIONER
                                       (BY SHRI K.L. PANDEY - ADVOCATE)

                                       AND
                                       1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                             THE    PRINCIPAL  SECRETARY    ENERGY
                                             DEPARTMENT R/O MANTRALAYA VALLABH
                                             BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       2.    THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER MPPKVV CO.
                                             LTD. BLOCK NO. 07 SHAKTI BHAWAN RAMPUR
                                             JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       3.    THE CHIEF ENGINEER MPPKVV CO. LTD. REWA
                                             DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       4.    THE SUPDT. ENGINEER (CIVIL) MPPKVV CO. LTD.
                                             REWA DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                  .....RESPONDENTS
                                       (BY SHRI A.K. SHARMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR THE STATE)

                                             This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the

Signature Not Verified
  SAN
                                       following:
                                                                          ORDER

Digitally signed by MOHD TABISH KHAN

This writ petition is filed being aggrieved of the order dated 14.02.2023 Date: 2023.06.16 19:42:46 IST

passed by the Superintendent Engineer (Civil) Madhya Pradesh Poorv Ksheta Vidyut Vitaran Company Lmitied, Rewa.

It is submitted that order is in three parts, firstly, for not able to execute the agreement in terms of the contract petitioner has been debarred from executing the contract. In second part, a security deposit of Rs.9950/- has been forfeited. As a third step, he has been blacklisted and declared to be ineligible for participating in any tender of similar nature.

Reliance is placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Division Bench of this High Court in W.P. No.12087/2022 decided on 01.07.2022 (Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. Company Vs.

Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India and Others) to point out that the said judgment has discussed decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vet India Pharmaceuticals Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another reported in (2021) 1 SCC 804, wherein it is provided that until and unless there is a specific show cause notice seeking to blacklist, no action to blacklist can be taken. Para 11 of the said judgment is reproduced herein under-

" If the respondents had expressed their mind in the show cause notice to blacklist, the appellant could have filed an appropriate response to the same. The insistence of the respondents to support the impugned order by reference to the terms of the tender cannot cure the illegality in absence of the appellant being a successful tenderer and supplier. We, therefore, hold that the order of blacklisting dated 08.09.2009 stands vitiated from the very inception on more

Signature Not Verified than one ground and merits interference"

SAN

Hon'ble Supreme Court in UMC Technologies Private Limited Vs. Digitally signed by MOHD TABISH KHAN Date: 2023.06.16 19:42:46 IST

Food Corporation of India and another, (2021) 2 SCC 551 . So also in

case of Gorkha Security Services Vs. Government (NCT of Delhi) and others, (2014) 9 SCC 105, has taken a similar view.

Thus, placing reliance on aforesaid judgments, it is evident that there could not have been any blacklisting without issuance of show-cause notice. This aspect has been considered by this Court while deciding W.P. No.1038/2018 (M/s Riyansh Roadways, A Proprietorship Firm Vs. M.P. State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited and Others) wherein this Court has held that there cannot be an order of blacklist without giving opportunity of hearing.

When these decisions are taken into consideration, then order of blacklisting without opportunity cannot be given a seal of approval and to that extent, order of blacklisting deserves to be set aside and is hereby quashed.

Petition is allowed in part. Other part of the impugned order except that of blacklisting shall remain intact which does not call for any interference.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE Tabish

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by MOHD TABISH KHAN Date: 2023.06.16 19:42:46 IST