SAI SHIV ENTERPRISES Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri Anil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos.4 and 5.

(2.) It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the order impugned passed by the respondent No.5 is arbitrary, unjust, illegal and liable to be set aside by this Court due to reasons that no opportunity of personal hearing was given to the petitioner before passing the order impugned by which not only the tender of the petitioner was cancelled, security amount was forfeited but he was blacklisted. Nothing has been stated in the show cause notice regarding blacklisting of the petitioner but in the impugned order, the petitioner was also blacklisted without giving any opportunity of hearing as such the order of blacklisting of the petitioner is in complete violation of principles of natural justice. He further submits that the impugned order has been passed malafidely on the basis of ex-parte report at the instance of the President Zila Panchayat/respondent No.6 merely to harass and victimize the petitioner.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.