2025:JHHC:30753-DB -1 of 2- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 5261 of 2021 M/s Shailerdra Kumar, a proprietorship firm, having its office at 1B, Kash Apartment, Kusum Vihar, Morabadi, P.O & P.S: Bariatu District Ranchi Through its proprietior Shailendra Kumar, Aged about 49 years son of late Ram Lakhan Prasad Resident of Khelgaon housing complex, Hotwar P.O.: Hotwar, P.S.: Khelgaon, District: Ranchi. ... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand, represented through the secretory, construction department, government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O and P.S: Dhurwa District: Ranchi. 2. The Secretory, Building construction department, government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O and P.S: Dhurwa District: Ranchi. 3. Managing Director, Jharkhand state Building construction corporation limited, a Government of Jharkhand Undertaking, 3rd floor, Jharkhand state building construction corporation limited, Project Building, P.O and P.S: Dhurwa District: Ranchi. 4. Executive Director, Jharkhand state Building construction corporation limited, a Government of Jharkhand Undertaking, 3rd floor, Jharkhand state building construction corporation limited, Project Building, P.O and P.S: Dhurwa District: Ranchi. ... Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Tiwary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Piyush Chitresh, A.C. to A.G. For the JSBCCL : Ms. Khalida Haya Rashmi, Advocate. Mr. Ayush Kumar, Advocate. --------- 06/Dated: 06.10.2025 1. Heard the parties. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed for grant of the following substantive reliefs:- “For quashing the memo no. 1674 (Ni) dated 27.09.2021 (Annexure-2), issued by Executive Director, Jharkhand state Building construction corporation limited, Government of Jharkhand whereby and whereunder without considering facts materials and evidences on record in true prospective and without providing any opportunity of hearing, the petitioner was debarred from participating in future tender till the completion of work which is wholly arbitrary unjust and unsustainable in the eye of law. 2025:JHHC:30753-DB -2 of 2- For directing the respondents to release fund and pay the bills already submitted by the petitioner for work done as the same is not released since last one year so that the petitioner can complete all the work in time as due to non release of fund petitioner is not in a position to complete the work, in the facts and circumstances of this case for doing conscionable justice to the petitioners.,” 3. The petitioner appears to have been aggrieved being blacklisted by the respondents till the completion of the work in question. 4. It is not in dispute that the work in question has already been completed meaning thereby that the blacklisting of the petitioner has also come to an end with the completion of the work. 5. In this view of the matter, since the work in question has been completed, therefore, the instant writ petition has become infructuous and is disposed of accordingly. 6. Pending Interlocutory Application, if any, stands disposed of. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 06.10.2025 N.A.F.R. APK/VK