Limitation Period For Specific Performance Starts From Date Of Refusal If No Fixed Date Stipulated In Agreement: Karnataka High Court Pensionary Benefits Not ‘Pecuniary Advantage’, Cannot Be Deducted From Income For Motor Accident Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Propounder Faces Heavy Burden Of Proof When Testator Is Illiterate; Registration Does Not Cure Unexplained Suspicious Circumstances: Supreme Court Mother Killing Minor Children Over Husband's Refusal To Take Her To Workplace Is Murder, Not Culpable Homicide: Andhra Pradesh High Court Specific Performance Of Registered Agreement To Sell Is No Longer Discretionary Post-2018 Amendment: Allahabad High Court Civil Court Has Jurisdiction To Determine If Tenanted Property Belongs To Joint Family Even If Tenancy Order Stands In Individual Karta's Name: Bombay High Court Notice Under Section 107 BNSS Mandatory Before Attaching Property; Right To Property Is A Constitutional Right: Calcutta High Court Post-Cognizance Arrest 'Makes No Sense' If Investigation Completed Without Arrest: Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under BNSS Criminal Courts Cannot Be Used To Settle Civil Inheritance Disputes Over Appreciated Land Values: Gujarat High Court Quashes Fraud Case Accused Must Raise Probable Defence To Rebut Statutory Presumption Under Section 139 NI Act If Signatures Are Undisputed: Himachal Pradesh High Court Passing Departmental Exam Not A Pre-requisite For Grant Of ACP/MACP Benefits: Jharkhand High Court Convenience Of Family And Accused Paramount For Jail Shifting; Trial Court Can't Reject Application Merely For Non-Residency: J&K High Court Litigants Who Attempt To Pollute The Stream Of Justice With Tainted Hands Are Not Entitled To Any Relief: Karnataka High Court Trial Court Must Implement Modified Preliminary Decree In Full: Telangana High Court Directs Partition Of Property Omitted In Final Decree Proceedings If Grievance Is Real But Lies Before Different Forum, Plaint Should Be Returned Under Order VII Rule 10 CPC, Not Rejected: Rajasthan High Court Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Due To Severity Of Economic Offence If Evidence Is Documentary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Non-Compliance With Mandatory Duty To Inform Grounds Of Arrest Under Section 47 BNSS Is Impermissible: Orissa High Court Grants Bail Land Acquisition Award Finality Under Section 12 Is A Bar To Writ Petitions Challenging 'Public Necessity': Madhya Pradesh High Court State As Eminent Domain Is Obligated To Pay Adequate Compensation, Not Minimum To Suit Its Convenience: Madras High Court Kerala High Court Grants Emergency Parole To Life Convict To Execute Sale Deed, Repay Bank Loan To Prevent Family's Eviction High Court Cannot Act As Court Of First Instance In Service Matters Amenable To CAT Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court Election Tribunal Has No Jurisdiction To Declare Caste Certificate Forged, Authority Vests Solely With Scrutiny Committee: Allahabad High Court Order IX Rule 7 CPC Requires 'Good Cause' Not 'Sufficient Cause'; Trial Court Can't Apply Higher Threshold To Pre-Decree Proceedings: Telangana High Court Victim Cannot Maintain Appeal Seeking Enhancement Of Sentence Under Section 372 CrPC; Such Power Exclusively With State: Rajasthan High Court Disability Pension: Presumption In Favour Of Personnel If Found Fit At Enrollment; Percentage Must Be Rounded Off: Punjab & Haryana HC Employee Entitled To Second Kramonnati Benefit If Promotion To Higher Post Does Not Result In Higher Pay Scale: Madhya Pradesh High Court Borrowers Can Be Granted Opportunity To Clear Loan Overdues In Installments To Prevent Coercive Action Under SARFAESI Act: Kerala High Court

Debarment Without Proper Show Cause Notice Cannot Be Sustained – Delhi High Court Sets Aside Debarment of M/S State Engineers by Pragati Power Corporation Ltd.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court today set aside the debarment communication issued by Pragati Power Corporation Ltd. (PPCL) against M/S State Engineers, emphasizing the fundamental principle of natural justice in administrative decision-making.

The petitioner, M/S State Engineers, had approached the court challenging the communication dated 17.06.2020, which debarred them from participating in any tenders floated by IPGCL or PPCL for a period of three years. The debarment was based on allegations of non-payment of wages and other dues to contractual employees.

In the judgment delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subramonium Prasad, the court scrutinized the circumstances leading to the debarment. The court observed, "Pursuant to the show cause notice, replies have been given by the Petitioner and the impugned communication dated 17.06.2020 has been issued by the Respondent debarring the Petitioner for a period of three years from participating in any tenders floated either by the IPGCL or PPCL."

Highlighting the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice, the court found that there was a lack of a specific show cause notice for the debarment. Justice Prasad noted, "It is not the case of the Respondent that violation of a term of contract would automatically result in debarment. It is now well settled by the Apex Court in a number of judgments that before debarring any entity, a notice must be given to that entity informing that the entity would be debarred. Debarment without show cause notice cannot be sustained."

The court also referred to the Apex Court's observations in UMC Technologies (P) Ltd. v. Food Corporation of India, which underscore the necessity of a prior show-cause notice and reasonable opportunity of being heard before any action like blacklisting or debarment is taken.

Concluding the judgment, the High Court set aside the debarment communication and allowed the respondent to issue a fresh show cause notice to the petitioner for debarment on valid grounds, emphasizing the need for fair and just administrative processes.

Date of Decision: 1st February, 2024

M/S STATE ENGINEERS VS PRAGATI POWER CORPORATION LTD.

 

Latest Legal News