IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8241 of 2010 SHAILENDRA KUMAR SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 12.5.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner is a registered contractor with the respondent authority in his individual capacity. Prior to that there was a registration existing in the name of “Maa Amba Technocrate Private Limited which is a private limited company registered under Indian Companies Act 1956. Petitioner claims himself to be the Managing Director of the said company. The company has carried out contracts assigned to him and it is the contention of the petitioner that since the present petitioner happened to be Managing Director of the said company it was ok his show and his baby and the experience earned by the company was actually experience gained by petitioner. When a new tender was advertised which was tender no. 1/2010-11 dated 8.4.2010 by Water Resources Department petitioner submitted his tender paper along with experience certificate. The authority on scrutinizing the document came to a conclusion that the petitioner has tried to pass on an experience certificate issued in the name of another institution as his own. Viewing the matter seriously a show cause was issued and now even blacklisting order has been passed for having committed breach of certain provisions of Bihar Contractors Registration Rule 2007. - 2 - Petitioner has already filed an appeal against the order and the same has not been decided. Pendency of the appeal comes in the way of adjudication of the present writ application. The Court does not want to deal with all aspect of matters. However the Court would like to observe and would like the appellate authority to consider that the petitioner being a contractor does not understand the difference between an individual and a company. Merely because the experience certificate offered by him was of the company of which he was the Managing Director, there seems to be merger of identity of the petitioner in the company or vice versa. The law does certify the understanding of the petitioner, but the foolishness of the petitioner should not be treated as a conduct of misdemeanor since it is not disputed that the experience certificate issued to private limited company is not alien to the petitioner. The authority therefore must view the matter in the above background. The petitioner has learnt a lesson and may now knows the necessary of distinction between a registered private limited company under the Companies Act and an individual identify. This writ application stands disposed of with a direction to the appellate authority to decide the appeal within a reasonable time frame. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)