IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17257 of 2009 R.K.CONSTRUCTION BEGUSARAI THROUGH ITS PROPEITOR HARI SHANKAR PRASAD S/O SRI RAM NARESH PD. SINGH R/O VILLAGE RATANPUR PO + PS + DISTT- BEGUSARAI -------------------------------- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF (CENTAL) FLOOD DIV. PATNA 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER FLOOD CONTROL DIVISION, BEGUSARAI-- ----------------------------- RESPONDENTS. ----------- 5 27.4.2010 Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Challenge in the present writ application is to the decision contained in annexure-9 dated 27.10.2007. By virtue of this decision the Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar has issued a list of contractors who have been debarred as defaulter and they have been debarred for participation in future tender till they complete the earlier work awarded or assigned to them. The name of the petitioner figures at serial no. 4 of the list. Submission of learned Senior counsel for the petitioner is that in terms of the notice contained in annexure-8 the petitioner was granted time till 30.11.2009 to complete the work. If no work was completed by that date, measurement of the work would be taken between 3.12.2009 to 5.12.2009 and the consequential action would flow from the agreement. His further submission is that if the respondent themselves had fixed 30.11.2009 as a date for completion of work then the debarment decision dated 27.10.2009 was a rush decision and pre-empting the time already granted to the petitioner. Obviously the decision is arbitrary to that extent. - 2 - On a pointed question being put by this Court whether the work in question has been completed even by April, 2010, the answer is a “No”. Many reasons have been stated indicating that road blocks in the way of completion of the work is because of certain action or inaction on the part of the State authority. From the pleadings itself it is evident that the contract was awarded way back in the year 2007 and the time frame in this regard was one year. More than three and half years has elapsed since the contract was awarded. If the petitioner has failed to complete the work and that too relating to flood protection then annexure-9 is least which the respondents were required to issue. Disqualification or debarment of the petitioner is temporary in nature only till he completes the work. The Court is of the opinion that the decision of the respondent is not arbitrary and annexure-8 is not the touch stone testing the validity of annexure-9. The decision is warranted by the conduct of the petitioner. This writ application has no merit and it is dismissed. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)