Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Shanti Maitri Mission Sansthan vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 24 April, 2023
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2023/RJJD/011673]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5478/2023
Shanti Maitri Mission Sansthan, Panchayat Samiti Campus, Jaipur
Road, Bikaner - 334001 Through Its Chief Executive Officer Sh.
Mukul Gaur S/o Kapil Gaur, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Ward No.
33, Behind Kumharon Ki School, Loonkaransar, District Bikaner.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Local
Self Government Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
2. The Director And Speical Principal Secretary, Directorate,
Local Bodies, Near Civil Lines Railway Phatak, C-Scheme,
Jaipur.
3. The District Collector, Bikaner.
4. The Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Bikaner.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dev Krishna Gaur
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sunil Beniwal, AAG
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
24/04/2023
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown the order
passed by a coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court in S.B. Civil
Writ Petition No.11302/2022 (Kisan Gramin Vikas Samiti Vs. State
of Rajasthan & Ors.), decided on 04.02.2023. The order reads as
follows:-
"This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with
the following prayers:-
"It is, therefore humbly prayed that your
Lordship may graciously be pleased to accept
and allow this writ petition and by an
(Downloaded on 26/04/2023 at 10:22:47 PM)
[2023/RJJD/011673] (2 of 4) [CW-5478/2023]
appropriate writ, order or direction, the
impugned order dated 8.07.2022 (Annexure-9)
passed by the respondent NO.2 may kindly be
quashed and set aside in the interest of justice.
Any other appropriate order or direction which
this Hon'ble Court deems expedient in the facts
and circumstances of the caes may kindly be
passed in favour of the petitioner."
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has
challenged the order dated 08.07.2022 passed by the
respondents whereby the petitioner-firm has been
blacklisted without providing opportunity of hearing and
penalty of Rs.1 lac has also been imposed upon it. Counsel
further submits that it is a case of non-application of mind
and action of the respondents is also in violation of the
principles of natural justice as the impugned order has
been passed without hearing the petitioner.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter Gorkha
Security Services Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
reported in 2014 (9) SCC 105 in para Nos.31 & 33 has
held as under:-
31. When it comes to the action of blacklisting
which is termed as 'Civil Death' it would be
difficult to accept the proposition that without
even putting the noticee to such a
contemplated action and giving him a chance to
show cause as to why such an action be not
taken, final order can be passed blacklisting
such a person only on the premise that this is
one of the actions so stated in the provisions of
NIT. The "Prejudice" Argument
33. When we apply the ratio of the aforesaid
judgment to the facts of the present case, it
becomes difficult to accept the argument of the
learned ASG. In the first instance, we may
point out that no such case was set up by the
Respondents that by omitting to state the
proposed action of blacklisting, the Appellant in
the show cause notice has not caused any
prejudice to the Appellant. Moreover, had the
action of black listing being specifically
proposed in the show cause notice, the
(Downloaded on 26/04/2023 at 10:22:47 PM)
[2023/RJJD/011673] (3 of 4) [CW-5478/2023]
Appellant could have mentioned as to why such
extreme penalty is not justified. It could have
come out with extenuating circumstances
defending such an action even if the defaults
were there and the Department was not
satisfied with the explanation qua the defaults.
It could have even pleaded with the
Department not to blacklist the Appellant or do
it for a lesser period in case the Department
still wanted to black list the Appellant.
Therefore, it is not at all acceptable that non
mentioning of proposed blacklisting in the show
cause notice has not caused any prejudice to
the Appellant. This apart, the extreme nature of
such a harsh penalty like blacklisting with
severe consequences, would itself amount to
causing prejudice to the Appellant.
The respondent(s) have not submitted any
document on record to show that the petitioner was
given opportunity of hearing prior to passing of the order
dated 08.07.2022.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
This writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to
be allowed for the reasons; firstly, the order dated
08.07.2022 (Annexure-9) has been passed by the
respondents without providing any opportunity of hearing
which in my considered view is in violation of principle of
natural justice; secondly, in view of the judgment passed
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Gorkha
Security Services (supra). I deem it proper to exercise
the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India.
In that view of the matter, this writ petition stands
allowed. The order dated 08.07.2022 is set aside. The
respondents are at liberty to pass fresh order against the
petitioner after providing proper opportunity of hearing."
(Downloaded on 26/04/2023 at 10:22:47 PM)
[2023/RJJD/011673] (4 of 4) [CW-5478/2023]
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is
nothing distinguishable from the aforequoted order.
3. Learned Additional Advocate General opposed but is unable
to point out any distinction from the aforequoted order, however,
he submits that though individual notice was not given but general
notice have been given.
4. In light of the aforequoted order, the present writ petition is
allowed in the same terms. The orders dated 04.04.2023 and
13.04.2023 are quashed and set aside with a clear liberty to the
respondents to pass fresh order against the petitioner after
providing proper opportunity of hearing.
5. All pending applications stand disposed of.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
102-nirmala/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
