IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23381 OF 2006 Between: V.Ramanjaneya Reddy … Petitioner And Government of A.P., Represented by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation & Command Area Department and others. … Respondents This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23381 OF 2006 ORDER: - The petitioner is a Special Class Contractor with the 1st respondent undertaking the execution of civil works and contracts. The Government has introduced the process of “E-procurement” for receiving tenders and processing the same. Guidelines were issued from time to time regarding the procedure to be followed for submission of E-tenders. Very extensive guidelines are issued in G.O.Ms.No.6, Irrigation & CAD (PW-Reforms) Department, dated 11.01.2005. Paras 5(c) and 5(h) were added to that G.O., vide another order in G.O.Ms.No.245, Irrigation & CAD (PW. Reforms) Department, dated 30.12.2005. According to that, the order copies of demand drafts to the bank guarantees of E.M.D. etc., must be uploaded within a stipulated time. It was also mentioned that, any failure in this regard would lead to suspension/disqualification of the tenderer from participating in the tender on “E-procurement” platform for a period of 12 months from the date of bid submission. Government issued G.O.Ms.No.51, Irrigation & CAD (PW.Reforms) Department, dated 17.03.2006 keeping G.O.Ms.No.245, I&CAD (PW.Reforms) Department, dated 30.12.2005, in abeyance. It is stated that the petitioner submitted a tender for an irrigation work through E-procurement. Being under the impression that it is no longer necessary to upload the hard copy of the demand draft in view of G.O.Ms.No.51, dated 17.03.2006, he did not upload the same. However, by enforcing Clause 5(h) introduced through G.O.Ms.No.245, dated 30.12.2005, the respondents disqualified the petitioner. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Respondents filed a counter affidavit stating that the petitioner did not upload the demand draft and by operation of clause 5(h) of G.O.Ms.No.6, he stood disqualified. The motive behind non-uploading of hard copies by various modes is not known. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Irrigation and Command Area Department. The Government no doubt introduced E-procurement system. However, they went on changing the procedure in this regard. As regards, uploading the hard copies of D.Ds and bank guarantees, a clause was introduced in G.O.Ms.No.245. Had that clause been in operation when the petitioner submitted his tender, the consequences would certainly have followed. It is a matter of record that G.O.Ms.No.245, through which clause 5(h) was introduced, was kept in abeyance through another G.O.Ms.No51, dated 17.03.2006. Hence, there was no basis for disqualifying the petitioner. Even otherwise, disqualification of a tenderer from submitting the tenders, amounts to blacklisting. It is well settled principle of law that before blacklisting a contractor, the concerned Department of the Government must issue a show cause notice. The respondents cannot assume to themselves, certain facts and visit the petitioner with penal consequences. Admittedly, no show cause notice was issued to the petitioner. Hence the writ petition is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner did not incur any disqualification by operation of clause 5(h) in G.O.Ms.No.6, Irrigation & CAD (PW-Reforms) Department, dated 11.01.2005, introduced through G.O.Ms.No.245, Irrigation & CAD (PW- Reforms) Department, dated 30.12.2005. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 8th JUNE 2010 Lmv