STATE OF BIHAR Vs. LAXUMAN PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER grant of a contract in favour of the writ petitioner, the same was cancelled by an order, which was annexed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition, on the ground that the writ petitioner has been blacklisted for having committed acts in relation to a past transaction inter se the parties. In the writ petition it was stated that the petitioner is not aware of his blacklisting.

(2.) ON the basis of the counter affidavit, as was originally filed, the learned Judge proceeded on the basis that the pititioner had no knowledge of blacklisting, Having regard to the contentions, raised in the counter affidavit the learned Judge also found that the allegations on the basis whereof the petitioner wag blacklisted were not against the petitioner, The learned Judge also felt on the basis of the pleadings in the original counter affidavit that in relation to an incident of 2000-2001, blacklisting proceeding could not be initiated in 2006.

(3.) SUBSEQUENT to the Judgment being rendered, which has been challenged in the present appeal, a Miscellaneous Application was filed on behalf of the respondents in the writ petition in order to bring to the notice of the Court that a show cause was issued against the petitioner on 8-5-2002 levelling certain allegations against the petitioner and the same was answered by the petitioner on 14-8-2002. It was contended in the said miscellaneous Application that the allegations made in he writ petition to the effect the petitioner had no knowledge of the blacklisting proceeding is untrue.