Simplified Explanation of the Judgment
The Patna High Court recently set aside a 10-year debarment order issued against a contractor by the Bihar Rural Works Department. The Court held that the order was passed without following the principles of natural justice and without considering proportionality.
The petitioner, a registered partnership firm engaged in road construction, had an agreement dated 28 January 2020 for certain rural road works under the MMGSY scheme. The work related to two stretches — from Nahar Bharat Pandey to PCC Road Primary School, and from Sarnipur (Ranipur) Chowk to Abbas Anshari.
The Department alleged that the petitioner failed to complete the work within the stipulated time and, without issuing any show cause notice, the Engineer-in-Chief of the Rural Works Department issued Letter No. 2011 dated 12 July 2021 debarring the petitioner (along with others) from participating in tenders for ten years.
The petitioner challenged the order, seeking:
- Quashing of the debarment order.
- Declaration that it was unconstitutional under Articles 14 (equality) and 19(1)(g) (freedom to carry on business).
- Permission to participate in ongoing and future tenders.
Court’s Observations:
- Violation of Natural Justice:
The Court noted that no show cause notice was issued before imposing such a serious penalty. The absence of an opportunity to present a defence violated the basic principles of fairness. - Non-Compliance with Earlier Directions:
The Court recalled its earlier judgment in Raman Kumar Singh v. Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. (CWJC No. 16989/2017), where it had quashed an indefinite debarment order and directed adherence to natural justice requirements. Those principles were ignored here. - Lack of Reasoning & Proportionality:
The impugned order did not provide any reason for imposing a 10-year ban, nor did it assess whether such a long duration was proportionate to the alleged misconduct. Debarment has both civil and penal consequences and must be justified. - Civil & Penal Consequences:
Being debarred prevents the petitioner from participating in government tenders, affecting livelihood and reputation, thus making it essential for authorities to act with due care and provide detailed reasons.
Final Decision:
On the short ground of violation of natural justice, the High Court quashed the order dated 12 July 2021. The petition was disposed of, noting that the petitioner had already suffered by missing multiple tender opportunities during the pendency of the case.
Significance or Implication of the Judgment
- Reinforcement of Natural Justice:
Government authorities must issue a proper show cause notice before blacklisting or debarring a contractor. Skipping this step renders the action invalid. - Proportionality in Punishment:
Harsh penalties like decade-long debarment require strong justification. Authorities must explain why such severity is warranted. - Impact on Public Contracting:
The ruling ensures that contractors are not arbitrarily excluded from public procurement without due process. - Judicial Oversight:
The case reiterates that even in contractual matters involving the State, courts will intervene where actions are arbitrary or procedurally flawed.
Legal Issue(s) Decided and the Court’s Decision with Reasoning
- Was the debarment order valid despite no show cause notice being issued?
Decision: No. It violated natural justice and was quashed. - Was the penalty proportionate?
Decision: The Court found no assessment of proportionality and viewed the duration as unexplained. - Did the order comply with prior High Court directions?
Decision: No. The earlier Raman Kumar Singh case principles were ignored.
Judgments Referred by Parties
- Raman Kumar Singh v. Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., CWJC No. 16989 of 2017 (Patna High Court)
Judgments Relied Upon or Cited by Court
- Raman Kumar Singh v. Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., CWJC No. 16989 of 2017 (Patna High Court)
Case Title
M/s. Chandra Mohan Ojha v. State of Bihar & Ors.
Case Number
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14214 of 2022
Coram and Names of Judges
Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sanjay Karol
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Kumar
Names of Advocates and who they appeared for
- For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashish Giri, Advocate
- For the Respondents: Smt. Archana Meenakshee, GP 6
Link to Judgment
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.
