Sanjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20535 of 2016 ====================================================== Sanjay Kumar S/o Late Aniudh Singh, resident of village - Lodipur, P.S. Paraiya, District - Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Government of Bihar, Rural Works Department, Bisheshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Panta. 2.

The Engineer in Chief, Rural Works Department, Bisheshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 3.

The Chef Engineer, Rural Works Department, Bisheshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 4.

The Chief Engineer, Rural Works Department, Bisheshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 5.

The Superintending Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Tekari, District - Gaya 6.

The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Tekari, District - Gaya 7.

The Project Manager, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Tekari, District - Gaya ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Ajay- GA-5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) 09-05-2023 None appears for the petitioner. The matter is of the year 2016.

02. In the instant writ petition, petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):- "1. That this writ application is being file in the nature of writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 22.6.2016 (so far the petitioner

2/4 is concerned), issued under the signature of Engineer in Chief, Rural Works Department, Bihar, Patna vide letter no. 7567 by which and where under the petitioner is debarred from participation of the future tender after proclamation of defaulter due to non per formation of the works as per guide line given in the agreement and for issuance ofany appropriate writ or writs, order or orders, direction or directions as your lordships may deem fit and proper."

03. Annexure-10 dated 22.06.2016, reads as under:-

3/4

04. The aforesaid Annexure-10 dated 22.06.2016 is supported by a large number of contractors' name and other material information. Annexure-10 dated 22.06.2016 itself reveals that there is total non-application of mind by the author of Annexure-10. The petitioner has been debarred from participating in future tender. Further, even though notices were issued, neither of the parties have apprised this Court as to whether petitioner has filed his reply to the show-cause notice or not and further, if reply was filed, in that event, there is no whisper in Annexure-10 dated 22.06.2016 as to what was the reply filed by the petitioner against the show-cause notice. If he has not filed, in that event, Annexure-10 should have revealed that against the notice there is no reply from the petitioner. Therefore, it is a total non-application of mind insofar as Annexure-10 dated 22.06.2016.

05. Accordingly, Annexure-10 dated 22.06.2016 stands set aside insofar as petitioner is concerned, reserving liberty to the concerned respondent to proceed in accordance with law after taking note of Apex Court's decision in the case of UMC Technologies Pvt. Ltd. vs. Food Corporation of India and Anr., reported in (2021) 2 SCC 551 and later decision in the case of Isolators and Isolators Through Its Proprietor Mrs.

4/4 Sandhya Mishra vs. Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd. and Anr., reported in 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 330 (Para-34) and principles laid down therein.

06. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order.

07. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. (P. B. Bajanthri, J) ( Arun Kumar Jha, J) Ashish/- himanshu/- U