LALLOOJI AND SONS Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this Writ Petition, the Notice to Show Cause dtd. 5/1/2022 under Annexure-14 for blacklisting/declaring the Petitioner Firm as ineligible from participating in procurement process by Department of Tourism, Government of Odisha, and consequential Order dtd. 28/4/2022 under Annexure-23 blacklisting the Petitioner Firm for a period of two years, are sought to be quashed as the same are violative of terms of Requests for Proposal (RFP) dtd. 31/3/2021 and 21/9/2021.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case, in brief, is that Petitioner No.1 is a Partnership Firm registered under the Partnership Act, 1932 consisting of ten (10) Partners, and having its Branch Office, At-A-2, Shivalik Business Centre, Off. S.G. Highway, B/h, Rajpath Club, Ahmedabad-380054, Gujarat, India. Petitioner No.2 is the Managing Partner of the Petitioner No.1 Firm and is authorized to file this Writ Petition.

(3.) Mr. Pinaki Mishra, learned Senior Counsel appearing along with Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, learned Counsel for the Petitioner-Firm, contended that the blacklisting order dtd. 28/4/2022 passed by Opposite Party No.1 vide Annexure-23, is violative of the terms of the RFPs dtd. 31/3/2021 and 21/9/2021, as well as Articles 14 and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India. It is further contended that the Petitioner-Firm was never blacklisted by any Central Government or State Government or any Private Agency and, as such, there was no complaint against the Petitioner-Firm with regard to its work. It is further contended that the reliance placed on the order dtd. 3/12/2020 of the PMP has been duly withdrawn by the PMP, vide order dtd. 21/12/2021, and, as such, PMP has further declared the Petitioner-Firm to be eligible for future contracts with PMP. It is contended that the Order impugned has been passed after PMP executed a compromise agreement with the Petitioner-Firm and it stood recorded before the Arbitral Tribunal, Allahabd. But the same was not considered by the Authority and without any application of mind, the Authority mechanically passed the Order impugned, which cannot be sustained in the eye of law. It is contended that relying upon the order dtd. 3/12/2020, Notice of Show Cause was issued on 5/1/2022 and consequentially the Order of blacklisting dtd. 28/4/2022 was passed, which cannot be sustained in the eye of law and the same is liable to be quashed. It is further contended that by passing the blacklisting Order, effectively the lis, which was pending before this Court in W.P.(C) No. 35042 of 2021, has become infructuous for all purpose.