WP(C) 5083/2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE IA ANSARI Heard Mr. U Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. J Patowa ri, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondents. By order, dated 29-12-2008, passed by the respondent No. 2, namely, Chief Engine er, Public Works Department (PMGSY Works), Assam, Guwahati, the petitioner has b een black listed from participating or bidding for the projects of/or to be unde rtaken by the employer either directly in petitioner’s name or indirectly in any other name or association with any other person or entity in which the petition er may choose for carry on his business. Aggrieved by the order, dated 29-12-20 08, aforementioned, this writ petition has been filed. In similar circumstances, some writ petitions, namely, WP(C) Nos. 581/09, 414/09 and 408/09, were filed a nd have been disposed of by order, dated 03-08-2009. The three writ petitions af orementioned covered the subject of not only of black listing, but also of resci ssion of contract. With regard to the black listing, suffice it to point out that the impugned dire ction of black listing the petitioner was passed without according any opportuni ty of showing cause against the proposed action of black listing. In such circum stances, the directions, which were given by the order, dated 03-08-2009, shall also, in the considered opinion of this Court, govern the present case. The rele vant observations and directions made by the Court in its order, dated 03-08-200 9, read as under : In so far as the issue of blacklisting is concerned, since the petitioners were not afforded any opportunity before blacklisting orders were passed, it would b e appropriate to direct the respondents to take such action only after affording an opportunity to the aggrieved Contractors. Accordingly on this issue, if the respondents issues Show Cause Notices to the petitioners to enable them to put f orward their versions on the allegations against them and the respondents consid er such replies and thereafter takes an appropriate decision, it would, in my vi ew serve the cause of justice. Accordingly, the impugned blacklisting orders are hereby quashed but the respondents are permitted to proceed afresh, if so advis ed, on blacklisting of the writ petitioners, but only in accordance with law. Bearing in mind what has been observed and directed by the Court, the impugned o rder, dated 29-12-2008, is hereby set aside and quashed, but the respondents are permitted to proceed afresh, if so advised, on black listing of the writ petiti oner, but only in accordance with law. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition shall stand dispo sed of.