Patna High Court
Skylight Engineering and ConstructionversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The debarment order no longer survives for consideration as it merged with the subsequent cancellation of the work order, so the writ application is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, Skylight Engineering, challenged a debarment order dated 26‑04‑2024 issued by the Director (Program Implementation) of the Infrastructure Development Authority, claiming it was beyond the authority’s jurisdiction, violated natural justice by lack of notice, was based on incorrect facts, and imposed an indefinite ban from future tenders. The petitioner sought quashing of the debarment letter, declarations on jurisdiction and procedural fairness, and relief from the indefinite debarment. The respondents argued that the work order had already been cancelled, and consequently the debarment order merged into that cancellation and no longer existed for adjudication. The Court held that since the debarment order had been subsumed by the subsequent cancellation order, there was no surviving order to entertain, and therefore no further relief could be granted. Accordingly, the writ application was disposed of, with the Court indicating that the petitioner could still challenge the cancellation order in the appropriate forum. The decision underscores the principle that a court will not entertain relief against a dead order and emphasizes the need to pursue appropriate remedies against existing orders.
Issues considered
- The Director (Program Implementation) had jurisdiction to issue a debarment order under the Infrastructure Development Authority’s rules.
- Whether the debarment order violated principles of natural justice by not providing notice to the petitioner.
- Whether the debarment order, being indefinite, is valid under administrative law.
- Whether the debarment order survives after the work order was cancelled.
Subjects
- debarment
- jurisdiction
- natural justice
- tender eligibility
- administrative law
- writ jurisdiction
- cancellation order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13425 of 2025
======================================================
Skylight Engineering and Construction Proprietor Mukesh Kumar, Gender-
Male, aged about- 33 years, Son of Rameshwar Prasad Gupta, Resident of
Flat No.- 3A, Sushila Residency, Near Shiv Mandir, West Lohanipur, P.S.-
Kadamkuan, District and Town- Patna, Pin- 800003.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old
Secretariat, Patna.
2. The Infrastructure Development Authority, (A Government of Bihar
Undertaking) through its Chairman-cum- Chief Secretary, 1st Floor, Udhyog
Bhawan, East of Gandhi Maidan, Patna- 800004.
3. The Managing Director, the Infrastructure Development Authority, (A
Government of Bihar Undertaking), 1st Floor, Udhyog Bhawan, East of
Gandhi Maidan, Patna- 800004.
4. The Director (Program Implementation), the Infrastructure Development
Authority, (A Government of Bihar Undertaking), 1st Floor, Udhyog
Bhawan, East of Gandhi Maidan, Patna- 800004.
5. The Director, (Finance), the Infrastructure Development Authority, (A
Government of Bihar Undertaking), 1st Floor, Udhyog Bhawan, East of
Gandhi Maidan, Patna- 800004.
6. The Executive Engineer (Tech.), the Infrastructure Development Authority,
(A Government of Bihar Undertaking), 1st Floor, Udhyog Bhawan, East of
Gandhi Maidan, Patna- 800004.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lal Babu Singh, Advocate
For the IDA : Ms. Pallavi Pandey, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Vagisha Pragya, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)
5 29-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Following is the relief sought for in the present writ
application:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.13425 of 2025(5) dt.29-04-2026
2/3
“1. That, the Petitioner seek indulgence
of this Hon’ble Court for the following relief(s):
(i) For quashing of the Letter No.
2264/PDA dated 26.04.2024 (Annexure-P/8) of the
Respondent No. - 4, the Director (Program
Implementation), whereby and whereunder the
Petitioner has been debarred from participating in
the future tenders.
(ii) For appropriate declarations that :-
a) The impugned order of debarment of
the Petitioner dated 26.04.2024 is without
jurisdiction as the Respondent No.-4, the Director
(Program Implementation) is not the competent
authority.
b) The impugned order of debarment of
the Petitioner dated 26.04.2024 contained in Letter
No. 2264/PDA is violative of principles of natural
justice and fair play as no notice was given to the
Petitioner as to debarment by the competent
authority.
c) The ground of debarment of
Petitioner is contrary to actual fact and in any case
the Petitioner cannot be held liable for delay in the
execution of the construction work of “Construction
of Investors Facilitation Centre at Industrial Area,
New Bihta, Patna”.
d) The debarment of a contractor cannot
be for indefinite period.
(iii) For any other relief(s) of
consequential relief(s) to which the Petitioner may
be found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of
this case.”
3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that
Patna High Court CWJC No.13425 of 2025(5) dt.29-04-2026
3/3
the petitioner has approached this Court challenging the order of
the debarment. During the pendency of the present writ
application, the order of cancellation of the work order has
already been passed. Therefore, the debarment order stands
merged with the subsequent order of cancellation of work order.
4. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that
no further order is required to be passed in the present
application as the impugned order no longer survives for
consideration.
5. Accordingly, the present writ application stands
disposed of.
6. If so advised, the petitioner shall be at liberty to
challenge the order of cancellation of the work order before the
appropriate forum, in accordance with law.
7. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
(Shailendra Singh, J)
Sachin/-
U
Checking your session…