Simplified Explanation of the Judgment
In a recent decision, the Patna High Court has set aside a 10-year blacklisting order issued against a construction company by the Bihar State Educational Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (BSEIDC). The firm had been blacklisted based on allegations of submitting a false experience certificate during a government tender process.
The petitioner, a registered private construction company, received a show-cause notice on 25 January 2023 from the Chief Engineer of BSEIDC. The notice accused the company of using a false experience certificate and proposed blacklisting for a decade under the Corporation’s Contractors Registration Rules, 2012 (as amended).
Subsequently, an order dated 11 May 2023 officially blacklisted the company for 10 years. The petitioner approached the High Court seeking:
- Cancellation of the show-cause notice and the blacklisting order.
- Permission to participate in a fresh tender process (Re-Tender No. 29/2023) during the case’s pendency.
- Restraining the authorities from implementing the blacklisting order without court approval.
The company argued that the Chief Engineer lacked the legal authority to issue such a show-cause or blacklist it. It also highlighted that a similar matter had already been resolved in favor of another petitioner in CWJC No. 12290 of 2023, where the High Court had quashed an identical blacklisting order.
The Court acknowledged that the present case involved the same legal issues and facts as the earlier one, and the respondents did not contest this. As a result, the High Court extended the benefit of its earlier decision to this case, setting aside both the show-cause notice and the blacklisting order.
Significance or Implication of the Judgment
This judgment reinforces the principle that administrative authorities must act within their legal limits and follow due process. It offers legal protection to contractors and construction companies from arbitrary or unauthorized decisions by government functionaries.
The verdict emphasizes that the power to penalize, especially in cases involving livelihood and reputation, must be exercised lawfully and fairly. For the general public, this decision upholds accountability in government procurement and ensures that punitive actions are not taken lightly or without proper authority.
Legal Issue(s) Decided and the Court’s Decision
- Did the Chief Engineer have the jurisdiction to initiate blacklisting proceedings?
✔ No. The Court held that the Chief Engineer acted beyond jurisdiction. - Was the blacklisting order legally sustainable under the Contractors Registration Rules?
✔ No. The process was found to be flawed and without legal basis. - Did the decision in CWJC No. 12290 of 2023 apply to this case?
✔ Yes. The facts and legal position were identical and uncontested. - Relief granted to the petitioner
✔ The show-cause notice and the blacklisting order were both quashed. The petition was allowed.
Judgments Relied Upon or Cited by Court
- CWJC No. 12290 of 2023, decided on 07.10.2023 by the Patna High Court (identical issue; not disputed by respondents).
Case Title
Sarvagya Construction and Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Bihar State Educational Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. & Ors.
Case Number
CWJC No. 15686 of 2023
Coram and Names of Judges
Hon’ble Mr. Justice P. B. Bajanthri
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Jha
Names of Advocates and who they appeared for
Mr. Prabhat Ranjan, Mr. Ansh Prasad, Mr. Chandan Kumar — Advocates for the Petitioner
Mr. Girijish Kumar — Advocate for the Respondents
Link to Judgment
https://www.patnahighcourt.gov.in/ShowPdf/web/viewer.html?file=../../TEMP/0934262e-a4a3-40a8-833e-28d5444e8d63.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.
