Patna High Court
Bhupendra Prasad YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The Court did not set aside the debarment or blacklisting orders but directed the petitioner to make a representation and the respondent to decide the matter within six weeks with a reasoned order.
Summary
The petitioner, Bhupendra Prasad Yadav, challenged two office orders issued by the Executive Engineer, Public Health Works Division, Araria, which debarred him from participating in tender work for two years and recommended his blacklisting for five years with forfeiture of security, on the ground that he allegedly failed to maintain the Har Ghar Nal ka Jal Yojana water supply scheme. The petitioner contended that the pumps were being properly maintained and that the orders were unfounded. The High Court examined the nature of the relief sought and the procedural requirements for such punitive actions. The Court directed the petitioner to file a representation before the respondent Executive Engineer. It further ordered the respondent to consider the representation and pass a reasoned speaking order within six weeks, after affording a hearing to all stakeholders. Consequently, the writ application was disposed of pending the filing of the representation.
Issues considered
- What is the legality and procedural validity of the debarment order issued under Office Order No. 192 dated 24.10.2024?
- What is the legality and procedural validity of the blacklisting recommendation and security forfeiture under Office Order No. 265 dated 12.11.2024?
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a hearing and opportunity to make a representation before such punitive orders are confirmed?
Subjects
- debarment
- blacklisting
- public procurement
- water supply scheme
- due process
- representation
- writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3513 of 2026
======================================================
Bhupendra Prasad Yadav, son of Satyanarayan Prasad Yadav, Resident of
Near Global School, Amghatta Road Dumra, Amghatta, P.S.-Dumra, District-
Sitamarhi (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Engineer in Chief, Public Health Engineering Department, Bihar, Patna.
4. The Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Purnea.
5. The Superintending Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department,
Purnea.
6. The Executive Engineer, Public Health Works Division, Araria.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhu Nath Pathak, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. S. Raza Ahmad, AAG-5
Mr. Alok Ranjan, AC to AAG-5
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)
2 17-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The following reliefs have been sought in the
present writ application:
"(i) The Office Order No. 192 dated 24.10.2024
issued by the respondent Executive Engineer,
Public Health Works Division, Araria by which,
the petitioner has been debarred from
participation of tender work for two years for
alleged allegation of not maintaining properly
Patna High Court CWJC No.3513 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
Har Ghar Nal ka Jal Yojana in Rural Pipe Water
Supply Scheme Basaithi in Ward No. 08, 09, 10,
11, 12, 13 & 14 without verifying what sorts of
defect arising in said scheme under Rural Pipe
Water Supply Scheme Basaithi.
ii) The Office Order No. 265 dated 12.11.2024
issued by the respondent Executive Engineer,
Public Health Works Division, Araria by which,
the respondent Executive Engineer has
recommended to higher authority for making
black listing for 5 years and forfeit the security
for assigning reason of not repair the defect
arising in Water Supply through pipe which is
wholly misconceived on fact and in law."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
pumps in question are being properly maintained by the
petitioner.
4. Considering the nature of relief sought, the
petitioner is directed to make a representation before the
respondent no. 6.
5. In the event of filing of such representation, the
respondent no. 6 shall consider and dispose of the same by
passing a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law,
after affording due opportunity of hearing to all the
stakeholders, within a period of six weeks from the date of filing
of such representation.
6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the
Patna High Court CWJC No.3513 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
present writ application stands disposed of.
7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed
of.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
(Shailendra Singh, J)
Rajiv/Sujit-
U
Checking your session…