IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12722 of 2009 M/S BINDA PRASASD through its one of the partner Mr. Rajesh Kumar Son of Late Binda Prasad, Resident of Mohalla- Linepar, Mirazapur, P.O. & P.S.- Nawada, District Nawada, Pin- 805110 Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Principal Secretary, Rural Works Department, “ Vishweshwaraiya Bhawan”, Bailey Road, Patna 3. The Engineer-in-Chief cum Additional Collector cum Special Secretary, Rural Works Department, “ Vishweshwaraiya Bhawan”, Bailey Road, Patna 4. The Chief Engineer-4, Rural Works Department, “ Vishweshwaraiya Bhawan”, Bailey Road, Patna 5. The Superintending Engineer, Rural Works Department, “ Vishweshwaraiya Bhawan”, Bailey Road, Patna 6. The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, “ Vishweshwaraiya Bhawan”, Bailey Road, Patna ----------- 02/ 08.10.2009 I.A. 6239 of 2009 filed on behalf of the petitioner assailing Memo No. 2892 dated 14.9.2009, Annexure-6 is taken on record and shall form part of the writ application. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is a works contractor. He is aggrieved by the order, bearing letter No. 5882 dated 31.7.2009, Annexure-1, whereunder with reference to item no. 36 of the list appended with the said order, he has been debarred from undertaking further work in the department. Perusal of item no. 36 indicates that petitioner has been debarred for not completing Shahari Barh to Gwasa Shekhpura Path. Petitioner is further aggrieved by the order bearing Memo no. 2892 dated 14.9.2009, Annexure-6, whereunder his financial bid submitted for grant of 2 road laying contract from Pakri Barawan to Hasanganj has been rejected. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the basis of the aforesaid two impugned orders dated 31.7.2009 and 14.9.2009, Annexures- 1 and 6 is his failure to complete the execution of Shahari Barh to Gwasa Shekhpura Path. In this regard counsel for the petitioner submits that he has already executed more than 80% of the aforesaid works and in the light of the instructions of the State Government contained in Annexure-3, which has been issued by the Road Construction Department and addressed to the Secretaries of the Water Resources, Building Construction and Rural Works Department, if any contractor has completed 80% of the works, he could not have been placed in the list of debarred contractors. In this connection, it is further pointed out, with reference to the instruction of the Assistant Engineer, Works Sub-Division, Mokama dated 31.7.2009, Annexure-2 that petitioner has completed more than 85% work concerning Barh Shahari Sarmera Path and in the light of the factual assessment made by the Assistant Engineer, he could not have been placed in the debarment list. Let the petitioner represent against the order of debarment dated 31.7.2009, Annexure-1 and the order dated 14.9.2009, Ananexure-6 rejecting his financial bid before the Engineer-in-Chief, Respondent no.3 with reference to the 3 instructions of the State Government contained in letter no. 3987 dated 28.4.2009, Annexure-3 and the assessment made by the Assistant Engineer, contained in letter no. 41 dated 31.7.2009, Annexure-2 requesting the Engineer-in-Chief, Respondent no.3 to reconsider his exclusion from the list of debarred contractors, as he has already completed more than 80% work entrusted to him earlier and ought not to have been included in the list of debarred contractors. The representation should be considered by the Engineer-in-Chief, Respondent no.3 in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order. Any consideration of tender paper in the meanwhile shall be subject to the order passed on the representation of the petitioner in terms of this order. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ ( V.N. Sinha, J.)