THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI Writ Petition No. 13153 of 2011 Dated: 11.07.2011 Between: Balijapalli Vaddera Labour Contract Coop. Society, Kadapa District. … Petitioner And The Government of A.P., Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Hyderabad and another. … Respondents THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI Writ Petition No. 13153 of 2011 O R D E R: The petitioner is a Labour Contract Cooperative Society, which was granted contract by the 2nd respondent-Municipal Corporation for supply of contract based manpower for public health section. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the order dated 19.04.2011 passed by the 2nd respondent black listing the petitioner- society with effect from 03.04.2011 alleging that the petitioner was irregular in making payment to the workers and thus, failed to perform their part of obligations in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement. The impugned action of the 2nd respondent has been assailed primarily on the ground that the petitioner was not given an opportunity to explain the allegations on the basis of which the impugned order came to be passed. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent, the fact that the impugned order was not preceded by any notice could not be disputed. However, it is alleged that the petitioner had failed to submit the details of the attendance of workers regularly and the same had caused hardship to the Corporation to release wages to the workers. It is also stated that the petitioner was yet to submit the details from March, 2011 and because of non-payment of wages there was agitation from the workers. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. Even assuming that there were certain lapses on the part of the petitioner- society, it is essential to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to make a representation against the proposed action. It is a well settled principle of law that blacklisting, which disqualifies the person from participating in the future contracts, has civil consequences and therefore the person concerned must be given an opportunity to represent his case before he is put on the blacklist. Since no such opportunity was given to the petitioner, the impugned order of blacklisting on the face of it is in violation of principles of natural justice and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside on that ground alone. Accordingly, the impugned order is hereby set aside and the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to initiate fresh action following due process of law. No costs. _______________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 11.07.2011 KLP