Patna High Court
Shiv Security Services (Registered)versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The order cancelling the tender and work order is set aside as arbitrary and violative of natural justice.
Summary
Shiv Security Services was awarded a contract for supplying cook, water boy, sweeper and washer‑man services under NIT No.02/2025‑26 and began performance after a work order was issued. The contract was later cancelled by Memo No.3246 dated 13‑12‑2025 without any notice, specific reasons, or an opportunity to be heard, allegedly on the ground of unspecified irregularities in the tender process. The petitioner contended that the cancellation was arbitrary, violated natural justice and caused financial loss. The State argued that irregularities identified by the Directorate justified the cancellation. The Court held that the cancellation was arbitrary, lacked specific reasons, and breached the principles of natural justice, setting aside the impugned order and remitting the matter for fresh consideration with a hearing. The writ petition was consequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the cancellation of the tender and work order without notice or hearing violates the principles of natural justice.
- Whether a vague reference to ‘irregularities’ constitutes a sufficient ground for cancellation of an already‑executed contract.
- Whether the administrative authority acted arbitrarily in contravention of Article 12 of the Constitution.
- Whether the impugned order should be set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration.
Subjects
- tender cancellation
- natural justice
- administrative law
- writ jurisdiction
- arbitrariness
- procurement
- contractual rights
- Article 12
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.604 of 2026
======================================================
Shiv Security Services (Registered) A partnership firm having its head office
at D-184, 1st Floor, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi- 110008, through its
authorized signatory Shivesh Kumar Singh, Gender- Male, Aged about- 48
Years, Son of Jitendra Narayan Singh, Resident of Ward No. 10, TFT Colony,
Valmiki Nagar, Post Office- Valmiki Nagar, Police Station- Valmiki Nagar,
District- West Champaran, (Bihar)- 845107.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Assistant Inspector General of Police, Bihar
Special Armed Police Swabhiman Battalion Bihar Sardar Patel Bhawan
Nehru Marg, Patna.
2. The Directorate of Police, Bihar Special Armed Police, Swabhiman
Battalion, Sardar Patel Bhawan, Nehru Marg, Patna, Bihar.
3. The Assistant Inspector General of Police, Bihar Special Armed Police,
Swabhiman Battalion, Sardar Patel Bhawan, Nehru Marg, Patna, Bihar.
4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Bihar Special Armed Police,
Swabhiman Battalion, Collectariat Compound, Company Bagh,
Muzaffarpur, Bihar.
5. The Commandant, Bihar Special Armed Police Swabhiman Batallion,
Valmiki Nagar, West Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeet Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Advocate (05)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)
3 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ application has been filed for
quashing of the order contained in Memo No.3246 dated
13.12.2025, issued under the signature of the Commandant,
Bihar Special Armed Police Swabhiman Battalion, Valmiki
Patna High Court CWJC No.604 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026
2/6
Nagar, West Champaran, whereby the petitioner’s selection
pursuant to NIT No.02/2025/26, for supply of Cook, Water Boy,
Sweeper and Washer-man on an outsourcing basis has been
cancelled without issuing any notice to the petitioner and
without assigning any reason.
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that pursuant
to NIT No. 02/2025-26 dated 18.06.2025 issued by the
Commandant, Bihar Special Armed Police Swabhiman
Battalion, Valmiki Nagar for outsourcing services of Cook,
Water Boy, Sweeper and Washerman for three years, the
petitioner participated in the tender process and was declared
successful after being found L-1 in the financial bid.
Consequently, an agreement was executed on 26.07.2025 and
work order was issued on 29.07.2025, pursuant to which the
petitioner started supplying manpower and submitted bills duly
certified by the office of the Commandant. Subsequently, on the
basis of a complaint, an inquiry was conducted and thereafter
the work order issued in favour of the petitioner was cancelled.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
pursuant to the work order issued in favour of the petitioner, he
had already proceeded with the work. However, in the midst of
execution of the work the same has been cancelled by the
Patna High Court CWJC No.604 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026
3/6
impugned order contained in Memo No.3246 dated 13.12.2025,
without assigning any reason or giving any opportunity of
hearing to the petitioners. Learned counsel further submits that
the sudden cancellation of the work order has caused serious
prejudice, financial loss, and irreparable injury to the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the state submits that certain
irregularities were pointed out in the tender process, and
therefore the present tender process was cancelled. In this
regard, learned counsel for the state has referred to paragraph 18
of the counter affidavit, which is reproduced as under:
“18. That in reply to paragraph No. 16, it is
stated that the same relates to the decision of the Directorate
dated 09.12.2025 directing the DIG of the Batalion to cancel
the tender in question as there are discrepancies in the
selection of the agency. It is stated that the DIG of the
Battalion, North Division, Muzafarpur under his Memo No.
646 dated 18.10.2025 had pointed out irregularities in the
tender process carried out at the local level and had
suggested cancelling the tender. The same is self-
exhaustive.”
6. The relevant part of impugned order contained in
Memo No.3246 dated 13.12.2025, issued under the signature of
the Commandant, Bihar Special Armed Police Swabhiman
Battalion, Valmiki Nagar, is reproduced as under:
Patna High Court CWJC No.604 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026
4/6
“izdkf”kr fufonk ds foRrh; izfdz;k esa vkosnd }kjk ifjokn
i= esa ntZ djk;h xbZ vkifRr ,oa dkxtks ds laca/k esa Hkonh; }kjk tkWap ds
dze esa mDr fofRr; izfdz;k esa ik;h xbZ dbZ =qfV;ksa ds laca/k esa fcgkj fo”ks’k
l”kL= iqfyl funs”kky;] iVuk ds izklafxd i= ds }kjk foLr`r
leh{kksijkUr izdkf”kr fufonk la0&02@2025&26 dks jí djus dk fu.kZ;
fy;k x;k gS rnuqlkj Hkonh; dk;kZy; ds mi;qZDr izklafxd i= ds }kjk
fufonk la0&02@2025&26 dks jí djus laca/kh dkjZokbZ djrs gq, d`r
dkjZokbZ ls lacaf/kr izfrosnu miyC/k djkus dk vkns”k izkIr gqvk gSA”
7. From the perusal of order dated 13.12.2025, it
appears that tender was cancelled in midst of the execution of
work without assigning any reason or without affording any
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is apparent that a
vague statement regarding certain irregularities in the tender
process was made the ground for cancellation of tender. A mere
reference to “irregularity”, in the absence of any cogent or
specific reason cannot be treated as a valid ground for
cancelling the tender as well as already issued work order. Such
action taken during the subsistence of the agreement and while
the work was already under execution, is arbitrary and contrary
to the principles of natural justice.
8. It is a settled position of law that any administrative
decision affecting the rights of the parties/contractors must
follow a fair procedure of law. In the present case, fair
Patna High Court CWJC No.604 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026
5/6
procedure has not been followed, neither any specific defects
have been pointed out, nor any reason has been assigned for
cancellation of tender, and the issued work order. At this
juncture it is pertinent to take note of judgment rendered in
Silppi Constructions Contractors v. Union of India, reported in
(2020) 16 SCC 489, wherein the Supreme Court observed as
under:
“19. This Court being the guardian of
fundamental rights is duty-bound to interfere when there is
arbitrariness, irrationality, mala fides and bias.
....…
No doubt, the bodies which are State within the
meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution are bound to act
fairly and are amenable to the writ jurisdiction of superior
courts but this discretionary power must be exercised with a
great deal of restraint and caution.”
9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
and the discussions made above the order under challenge
contained in Memo No.3246 dated 13.12.2025 is set aside.
10. The matter is remitted back to the concerned
authority to reconsider the issue and pass a fresh order in
accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing
to all the stakeholders, including personal hearings, if required,
within a period of two weeks from the date of filing of any
Patna High Court CWJC No.604 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026
6/6
application for reconsideration by the petitioner.
11. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the
present writ application stands disposed of.
12. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
Ritik/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.