CREATIVE LAB Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P.(C) No. 3382 of 2021 was initially filed for quashing the order as contained in memo No. 615 dtd. 12/8/2021 passed by the respondent No.3 whereby the petitioner was permanently blacklisted. However, during pendency of the present writ petition, the respondent No.3 vide order as contained in memo No. 24 dtd. 7/1/2022 amended the impugned order dtd. 12/8/2021 fixing the period of blacklisting as five years and thereafter vide office order as contained in memo No. 472 dtd. 26/4/2022, reduced it to three years mentioning inter alia that the earlier orders as contained in memo No. 615 dtd. 12/8/2021 as well as memo No. 24 dtd. 7/1/2022 were recalled vide memo No. 471 dtd. 26/4/2022. The petitioner has therefore also challenged the orders dtd. 7/1/2022 and 26/4/2022 passed by the respondent No.3.

(2.) Cont. Case (Civil) No. 548 of 2021 has also been filed against the opposite party No.2 for wilful disobedience and non-compliance of the order dtd. 27/1/2020 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 01 of 2020.

(3.) Learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner submits that in spite of passing of the order dtd. 27/1/2020, the O.P. No.2 failed to make formal communication to all other educational institutions regarding stay of the operation of letter No. 13/19-1312 dtd. 24/12/2019, due to which all educational institutions were reluctant in granting fresh work to the petitioner as well as were not receiving/accepting the equipments as per earlier supply orders issued to the petitioner. Many tenders were floated by the B.I.T, Sindri in which the petitioner participated, however, in absence of a formal communication by the O.P. No.2 regarding stay of the operation of letter dtd. 24/12/2019, none of the bids submitted by it was considered.