Kumar Rabish Chandra v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2327 of 2025 ====================================================== Kumar Rabish Chandra S/o-Surendra Prasad Yadav R/o-Panchayat-Lagar, Vilage-Badi Lagar, P.O.-Lagar, P.S.-Parbatta, District-Khagaria, (Proprietor). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Additional Chief Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Engineer-in-Chief-Cum-Special Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5.

The Joint Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 6.

The Chief Engineer-2, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

7.

The Superintending Engineer, Rural Works Department, Work Circle, Saharsa.

8.

The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Work Division, Gogri. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Alok Ranjan, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Raghwanand, G.A.-11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 07-05-2025

Patna High Court CWJC No.2327 of 2025 dt.07-05-2025 2/3 Heard Mr. Alok Ranjan, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Raghwanand, learned Government Advocate No. 11 for the State.

2. By the impugned order dated 14.11.2024, the petitioner has been blacklisted for three years.

3. It appears from the perusal of the order that the petitioner was the concessionaire of the respondents for construction of road from Kawela to Arariya. The work was not completed on time, and in fact the road in question remained in a very bad shape.

4. Considering this aspect of the matter, petitioner's agreement was cancelled vide order dated 08.01.2022.

5. The petitioner was then noticed to respond as to why he should not be blacklisted. He never responded to that notice. He was again reminded twice, but the two other notices also failed to evoke any response from the petitioner. It was only thereafter, considering the entire background facts and the conduct of the petitioner, a decision was taken to blacklist him for three years.

6. We do not find any fault with the order

Patna High Court CWJC No.2327 of 2025 dt.07-05-2025 3/3 impugned.

7. There is no merit in this petition.

8. The writ petition is dismissed.

(Ashutosh Kumar, ACJ) (Partha Sarthy, J) P.K.P./Avinash AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 08.05.2025 Transmission Date