HINDUSTAN SAMAJ VIKASH SANSTHAN, A NGO REGISTERED UNDER THE INDIAN TRUST ACT, 1882, DALTONGANJ REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, VIKASH CHANDRA TIWARI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Petitioner No. 1, a Non Governmental Organization registered under the Indian Trust Act, 1882 was allotted work under the Memorandum of Agreement dated 3.3.2008(Annexure-2) entered with the Director, Horticulture Mission, Jharkhand to implement and execute the work of National Horticulture Mission Programme in Hussainabad block of District Palamau. Petitioner was entrusted with the task of plantation of specified plants over an area of 142 acres which was extended to 200 acres for the year 2008-09 against which allotments were also released. The Respondents undertook a decision under the chairmanship of Deputy Commissioner, Palamau on 20.3.2013 on the basis of inspection report of 3 member team to place 4 agencies including the petitioner in blacklist and lodge F.I.R against it. It was also decided to institute certificate cases against each one of them for having shown zero progress in the matter of survival of plants for both financial year 2007-08 and 2008-09 as per the inspection report dated 1.10.2009 conducted by the Director, Agriculture. Annexure-F is the minutes of the decision dated 20.3.2010, which also refers to the directions of the Secretary, Agriculture and Sugarcane Development Department, Government of Jharkhand contained in letter No. 6764 dated 30.12.2009 based upon the inspection conducted by the Director, Agriculture wherein the implementation of different schemes in the District of Palamau, Latehar and Garhwa by these 4 N.G.O.s have shown unsatisfactory progress. Based on its decision dated 20.3.2010, impugned letter dated 7.1.2014 black listing the petitioner has been issued by the Respondent no.3, Director, Jharkhand State Horticulture Mission, Ranchi along with 3 others.

(3.) Besides addressing the allegation made through the counter affidavit, by way of its rejoinder on merits, learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned decision primarily on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice stating that no notice or show cause was issued prior to the issuance of the order of blacklisting.