Simplified Explanation of the Judgment
In a recent decision, the Patna High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of a bid and blacklisting of a contractor who had concealed his involvement in a pending criminal case. The petitioner had participated in a tender issued by the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation (BSFC) for transportation and handling (Door Step Delivery) of food grains in Siwan district. Despite offering the lowest financial bid, the petitioner’s participation was invalidated after authorities discovered that he had suppressed facts about a criminal case registered against him.
The petitioner had quoted a competitive rate of ₹28 per quintal for the tender, which was significantly lower than the ₹36 quoted by other participants. However, during scrutiny, the District Transport Committee discovered that the petitioner was an accused in a 2016 FIR related to black marketing of food grains. This information was neither disclosed in his affidavit nor mentioned during the bid process.
As per the tender terms, concealment of any criminal involvement, especially in cases relating to food grain pilferage or black marketing, leads to immediate disqualification and blacklisting for five years. The petitioner was issued a show-cause notice, to which he replied, admitting the pending FIR. The committee then forfeited his Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) and blacklisted him as per the tender norms.
The High Court examined the tender conditions and the facts of the case and held that the authorities acted well within the prescribed rules. Since the petitioner had submitted a false affidavit and concealed material information, the court found no reason to interfere with the administrative decision.
Significance or Implication of the Judgment
This judgment has significant implications for government contracting and public procurement. It reinforces the principle that transparency and integrity are critical for participation in public tenders. Contractors or bidders with pending criminal cases, especially involving moral turpitude or economic offences, cannot participate unless they fully disclose such facts. This ensures that public funds are not handled by those under legal scrutiny and upholds the accountability of contractors in welfare schemes like food distribution.
For the government, this decision validates strict enforcement of tender terms, discourages fraudulent practices, and protects the public exchequer. For the general public, especially in rural Bihar, it ensures that food distribution and related services are managed by credible and compliant contractors.
Legal Issue(s) Decided and the Court’s Decision
- Whether concealment of a criminal case by a bidder invalidates their participation in a government tender?
- Yes. Concealment is a clear violation of the tender terms.
- Whether the District Committee acted within its rights in forfeiting the EMD and blacklisting the petitioner?
- Yes. The committee followed the terms of the NIT, specifically clauses dealing with suppression of material facts.
- Was the petitioner’s offer to work at a lower rate sufficient to overturn the blacklisting?
- No. Financial benefit to the State does not override the importance of legal compliance.
Case Title
Nishant Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar & Others
Case Number
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 385 of 2024
Coram and Names of Judges
Hon’ble the Chief Justice
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy
Names of Advocates and who they appeared for
Mr. Rajendra Narain, Sr. Advocate – for the petitioner
Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh – for the respondents
Link to Judgment
https://www.patnahighcourt.gov.in/ShowPdf/web/viewer.html?file=../../TEMP/4a2d952c-6a80-4cde-be08-f2f86bf7267a.pdf&search=Blacklisting
If you found this explanation helpful and wish to stay informed about how legal developments may affect your rights in Bihar, you may consider following Samvida Law Associates for more updates.
