IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5954 of 2009 ***** M/S Debashree Constructions (India) Pvt. Ltd., a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 having its office at New Area, Maharajganj Road, Aurangabad, Bihar, through it’s Managing Director Smt. Geeta Singh, wife of Sri Kaushal Kumar Singh, resident of New Area, Maharajganj Road, P.S. Town Thana Aurangabad, Aurangabad, Bihar. …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Engineer-in-Chief, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Chief Engineer, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. The Superintending Engineer, Bhojpur Road Circle, Road Construction Department, Ara. 6. The Executive Engineer, Road Division, Road Construction Department, Dehri-on-Sone. 7. The Assistant Engineer, Road Division, Road Construction Department, Dehri-on-Sone. 8. The Junior Engineer, Road Division, Road Construction Department, Dehri-on-Sone. …. …. Respondents ----------- 3. 30.11.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Two communications dated 21.4.2009 contained in Annexure-13 as well as 27.4.2009 contained in Annexure-15 both issued by the Executive Engineer, Road Division, Road Construction Department, Dehri-on-Sone is subject matter of challenge in the present writ application. By virtue of these two orders the petitioner company has been debarred from participating in any future tenders of the department on the ground that the petitioner has failed to carry out the responsibility of completing the work awarded in terms of tenders within the time frame or virtually abandoning the said work despite the opportunity given to the petitioner, cost awarded against him and such other coercive measures which could be taken in this regard which is in terms of the agreement and the standard conditions for award of such tenders. - 2 - Submission of the counsel is that the order has come to be passed on the basis of a composite kind of show-cause which was issued to him on 4.3.2009 contained in Annexure-11. Petitioner did file his show cause but the same has been cursorily dealt with and the two impugned orders have come to be passed. Primary submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that the question of debarment will come into play provided the petitioner has been blacklisted after a proper proceeding is initiated in this regard. There is no provision for debarment of the petitioner from participating in any future tender in this regard under the respondent department. As already taken note of in the earlier part of the order Annexure-11 is a composite kind of notice in this regard. The stand of the Additional Advocate General-XI on behalf of the State is that these are standard clauses applicable in matters of such tenders or award of work and this is a temporary disqualification which a contractor has to earn for either non-completion of his work or for abandoning the work which has been duly awarded to him. The moment the petitioner completes the balance work or is willing to shoulder the responsibility this debarment will disappear. But from the stand taken in the writ application and the submissions made at Bar the petitioner’s stand is that he has already abandoned the work, work has now been awarded or re-tendered or to that extent he has nothing more to do with the contract in question. Without getting into the merits of the matter whether a temporary disqualification order can be passed against the petitioner at this stage the Engineer-in- - 3 - Chief, Road Constructions Department is directed to issue a fresh show- cause to the petitioner in question as to why he should not be blacklisted for the work not carried out by him or abandoned by him and after hearing the petitioner he shall pass an appropriate order in this regard and the consequences thereof will flow. He shall also consider the 1uestion of debarment within the same time frame. Let the exercise in this regard be completed by the concerned respondent, respondent no.3, within a period of three months from the date of communication/production of a copy of this order. In the meantime the question of debarment till the passing of the final order may be kept in abeyance. This writ application stands disposed of with above direction. Pawan/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)