9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Blacklisting of a small scale industry engaged in the manufacture and sale of drugs by the State government. 2. Compliance with principles of natural justice in the blacklisting process. 3. Validity of the order blacklisting the appellant based on reasons provided. Analysis: 1. The appellant, a small scale industry involved in the supply of drugs to government departments, was blacklisted by the State government due to irregularities discovered during a vigilance inquiry. The appellant challenged this order through a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, which was dismissed. The appellant then filed a special leave petition in the Supreme Court, which directed the State government to reconsider the matter while upholding the blacklisting order. Subsequently, the State government reaffirmed the blacklisting order, leading to another writ petition by the appellant in the High Court, which was also dismissed. The appellant appealed this decision. 2. The appellant contended that the blacklisting order was against the principles of natural justice as the materials forming the basis of charges were not provided along with the show cause notice. The Court rejected this argument, stating that while the appellant had a contractual relationship with the government, not governed by statutory rules, the principle of audi alteram partem (right to be heard) was observed by providing an opportunity to show cause. The Court emphasized that the requirement was to offer a chance for explanation before blacklisting, which was fulfilled in this case by the appellant's response to the show cause notice. 3. Another argument raised was the absence of reasons in the blacklisting order, rendering it invalid. The Court disagreed, noting that the High Court verified the record and confirmed that detailed reasons were indeed provided by the State government before passing the blacklisting order. The High Court acknowledged the existence of elaborate reasons supporting the decision, which were summarized in the order itself. Consequently, the Court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it, upholding the validity of the blacklisting order. In conclusion, the Supreme Court upheld the State government's decision to blacklist the appellant, emphasizing the adherence to principles of natural justice by providing an opportunity to show cause and ensuring that detailed reasons were recorded for the blacklisting. The Court found no grounds to overturn the blacklisting order and dismissed the appeal without costs.
|
