Vedant Foundation vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3731 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 3731 Raj
Judgement Date : 27 April, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Vedant Foundation vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 27 April, 2023

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

[2023/RJJD/012461]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5323/2023

Vedant Foundation, Through Its President Vedpal Yadav S/o Madaram Yadav, Aged About 35 Years, Having Its Address At Guwana, Behror, Alwar, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Local Self Government, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Director And Special Principal Secretary, Directorate Local Bodies, C-Scheme, Jaipur.

3. The District Collector, Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.

4. The Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.

5. The Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Kapasan, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.

                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Harshvardhan Singh
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. Kunal Upadhyay

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

27/04/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners has shown to this

Court the order dated 04.02.2023 passed by a coordinate Bench

of this Hon'ble Court at Jaipur Bench in Kisan Gramin Vikas Samiti

Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11302/2022

and prays that the same order may be passed in favour of the

present petitioners also.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

[2023/RJJD/012461] (2 of 4) [CW-5323/2023]

"It is therefore, most humbly prayed that the record of the csae be called and by any appropriate order, writ or direction, the impugned order dated 13.04.2023 (Annexure

7) may kindly be quashed with all consequential benefits.

Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit may be passed in favour of the petitioner."

3. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has

challenged the order dated 13.04.2023 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.

4. 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

[2023/RJJD/012461] (3 of 4) [CW-5323/2023]

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 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.

5. 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 13.04.2023.

6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. This writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be

allowed for the reasons; firstly, the order dated 13.04.2023

(Annexure-7) 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.