9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment deals with the issue of black-listing a bidder without prior notice and the principles of natural justice in administrative decisions. Black-listing without notice: The appellant was black-listed without any prior notice, which was contended by the State Government to be not required by the rules. However, the court emphasized the importance of following principles of natural justice in decisions with civil consequences. It was held that black-listing without giving the affected party a chance to be heard is against the rule of law. The portion of the order directing black-listing for future contracts was set aside, while the cancellation of the bid was upheld. Principles of natural justice: The court stressed that even if the rules do not explicitly state the need for notice, it is a fundamental principle of natural justice that parties affected by any decision should have the right to be heard and make representations. The judgment highlighted that black-listing individuals for business ventures has civil consequences, and therefore, the affected party should be given an opportunity to defend themselves before such a decision is made. Disposition of the appeal: The court disposed of the appeal by setting aside the black-listing order for future contracts but upholding the cancellation of the bid. It was clarified that the State Government could take future steps for black-listing the appellant, but only after providing due notice and an opportunity for representation. The court made it clear that they were not expressing any opinion on the allegations against the appellant, leaving the decision on future actions to the State Government following the principles of natural justice.
|
