Minakshi Swain vs State Of Odisha And Another .... ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 455 Ori

Orissa High Court

Minakshi Swain vs State Of Odisha And Another .... ... on 19 January, 2026

Author: Murahari Sri Raman

Bench: Murahari Sri Raman

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                 W.P.(C) No.35140 of 2025

             Minakshi Swain                               ....                Petitioner
                                                Mr. S. K. Nayak (2), Advocate
                                         -Versus-
             State of Odisha and another            ....       Opposite Parties
                                                  Mr. Debashis Tripathy, AGA


                                 CORAM:
                       HON' BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                                   AND
                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

                                             ORDER

Order No.                                   19.01.2026

   01.      1.    The petitioner has challenged the order dated 1st November,

2025 by which he was debarred / blacklisted from participating in

future tender for a period of three successive years primarily on the

ground that the said order is violative of principles of natural justice.

2. According to the petitioner, neither any show-cause notice was

issued nor an opportunity of hearing was given and the authority

surreptitiously issued the blacklisting / debarment order for a

successive period of three years. The judgment of this Court rendered

in Artatran Bhuyan v. State of Odisha & Ors. reported in 2025 (II)

ILR-CUT-1042 is relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner

that there is no fetter on the part of the Court to reduce the period of

debarment / blacklisting, if the default and/or violation of the terms

and conditions of the contract is not so grievous.

3. We had an occasion to peruse Annexure-3 to the instant writ

petition, which is a subject matter of challenge in the instant writ

petition. The third paragraph of the said order reflects the steps

having taken by the authorities before embarking the journey in

relation to blacklisting / debarment of the petitioner. It is clearly

discernable therefrom that a show-cause notice was served vide

Department letter No.22324/H, dated 31st July, 2025 upon the

petitioner giving him opportunity to file a written reply within seven

days from the date of issuance of the notice as to why an action

should not be initiated for cancellation of the Purchase Order and

blacklisting of the firm. Despite the show-cause notice having served,

the petitioner did not choose to file reply thereto. However, in

paragraph-8 of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has

categorically averred that he neither received any show-cause notice

nor was aware of any proceedings having initiated, which would

further be corroborated from the letter dated 17 th November, 2025

issued to the authority after receiving the impugned order.

4. Whether the show-cause notice was served on the petitioner or

not, we feel that the State must produce the relevant document in

support thereof.

5. Accordingly, list this matter on 27th January, 2026.

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

(M.S. Raman) Judge M. Panda

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by:

MRUTYUNJAYA PANDA Reason:

Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 20-Jan- 2026 14:28:31