2018 (7) TMI 2078 - HC - Indian Laws

Principles of Natural Justice - Blacklist and barred from participating in any transaction with Delhi Prisons Department - case of petitioner is that the impugned order has been passed without issuing any SCN to the petitioner, the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity of being heard; and also that the punitive measure imposed on the petitioner is impermissible inasmuch the petitioner has blacklisted the petitioner for all times to come - HELD THAT - There is good ground to hold that a party cannot be blacklisted for all times to come. There may also be instances where the person to be blacklisted is able to persuade the concerned authority that the default on his part is not intentional and has been caused due to reasons beyond his control. Clearly, in a situation where the respondent is convinced of the bonafides of such person, a punitive measure may not be warranted. Mr Singh fairly states that the matter would be considered by the concerned authority afresh in the aforesaid light. Impugned order set aside - The respondents shall issue a notice of hearing to the petitioner (without setting out allegations or providing any further material). It will be open for the petitioner to make his submissions before the concerned authorities. The concerned authorities shall, thereafter, pass a speaking order within a period of twelve weeks from today - application disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Impugning an order debarring petitioner from dealing with Delhi Prisons Department without notice or opportunity of being heard; Principles of natural justice not followed; Permissibility of punitive measure debarring petitioner forever; Interpretation of tender conditions and agreement; Consideration of blacklisting for all times to come; Affording adequate opportunity to be heard; Setting aside the impugned order; Issuing a notice of hearing to petitioner; Passing a speaking order within twelve weeks.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged an order debarring them from engaging with Delhi Prisons Department without prior notice or opportunity to present their case. The petitioner's counsel contended that the order violated principles of natural justice as no show cause notice was issued, no hearing was granted, and imposing a perpetual ban was impermissible. The respondents justified the order by referring to tender conditions and an agreement stating that defaulters could be blacklisted indefinitely. Additionally, a letter indicated the petitioner's awareness of the proposed blacklisting due to a specific failure. The court noted that permanent blacklisting may not be justified as circumstances could warrant reconsideration if defaults were unintentional or beyond control. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the petitioner was directed to participate in a fresh hearing where they could present their case. The concerned authorities were instructed to issue a speaking order within twelve weeks. The petitioner agreed not to engage with Delhi Prisons Department voluntarily until the new order was issued.