IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL REVIEW No.304 of 2025 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13538 of 2025 ====================================================== SIFY Digital Services Limited having its Registered Office at 2nd floor TIDEL PARK No.4, Canal Bank Road Taramani, Chennai- 600113, E-mail goel.amit@sifycorp.com through its Authorised Officer Sanjeev Kumar Agrawal, aged about 50 years, (M), S/o Late Shri P.N. Agrawal, R/o G-3, Plot No. 296, Sector- 4, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh- 201010. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary Education Department, Patna, Government of Bihar Vikash Bhawan, New Secretariat, Patna- 800015, Bihar, E-mail. itcell.education@gmail.com. 2. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board (BSEB), Sinha Library Road, (Near Sinha Library). Patna- 800017, Bihar, E-mail. coevividhbseb@gamil.com. 3. The Director, State Council of Education Research and Training (SCERT), Mahendru, Patna (Bihar), Pin No. 800006, E-mail. directorscertbihar@gmail.com. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinay Kumar Garg, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Amit Yadav, Advocate : Mr. Sriram Krishna, Advocate : Mr. K.S. Rekhi, Advocate : Mr. Shashank Shekhar Kunwar, Advocate : Mr. Amarjeet, Advocate : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. P.K. Shahi, AG : Mr. Satyabir Bharti, Sr. Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA) 3 18-03-2026 Heard the parties. 2. A writ application had been earlier filed by the petitioner praying for the relief(s): "(i) To issue an appropriate writ, order, or Patna High Court C. REV. No.304 of 2025(3) dt.18-03-2026 2/5 direction, preferably in the nature of certiorari, for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 22.07.2025 (Annexure P/24), whereby the Petitioner has been blacklisted till 31.03.2026 and the contract has been terminated. (ii) To issue a writ, order, or direction in nature of mandamus, commanding the Respondents to recall and withdraw the impugned order, and to restore the Petitioner's eligibility to participate in future tenders issued by the Respondent Department." 3. The said writ application was heard at length on 14.10.2025 and after hearing all the parties concerned, the said writ application was dismissed by a detailed reasoned and speaking order. While dismissing the said writ application, the Division Bench of this Court had framed certain important issues which were decided in the final judgment and order dated 14.10.2025. 4. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order dated 14.10.2025 passed in CWJC No. 13538 of 2025, the petitioner had filed an SLP bearing SLP No. (C) No. 33236 of Patna High Court C. REV. No.304 of 2025(3) dt.18-03-2026 3/5 2025. On 28.11.2025, the SLP filed by the petitioner was taken up before the Hon’ble Apex Court, the following order was passed: “UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following ORDER Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the Special Leave Petition, with liberty to file a review before the High Court. Permission granted. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid.” 5. In terms of the liberty granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this review petition has been filed by the petitioner for review of the judgment and order dated 14.10.2025 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWJC No. 13538 of 2025. 6. Several grounds for seeking review of the judgment and order dated 14.10.2025 has been advanced. During the course of argument, specific query was made to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that since the period of Patna High Court C. REV. No.304 of 2025(3) dt.18-03-2026 4/5 blacklisting was coming to an end on 31st March, 2026, would it be appropriate and relevant for the petitioner to continue to press this review petition? 7. After advancing some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the period of blacklisting was coming to an end on 31st of March, 2026 and though he would be free to participate in fresh tender after 31st of March, 2026 but this period of blacklisting will work to his detriment in getting fresh contracts in future and under this belief and impression the petitioner has no option than to press the review petition. 8. This argument being advanced on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner appears to be fallicious for the reason when the blacklisting order is for a fixed period which is going to come to end on 31st March, 2026, then under no circumstance, the period of blacklisting can possibly come in the way of awarding of fresh contracts in future, if otherwise, the petitioner would be found eligible. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore now submits that he is prepared to not press this petition on merit if this Court would give an observation that the period of blacklisting will not work to the detriment of the petitioner in Patna High Court C. REV. No.304 of 2025(3) dt.18-03-2026 5/5 awarding fresh contracts in future, if otherwise, the petitioner is found eligible. 10. To the aforesaid submission cum prayer made on behalf of petitioner the respondent parties do not have any objection. 11. In light of the aforesaid, and particularly taking note of the fact that the period of blacklisting is going to come to end on 31st March, 2026, on the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court refrains from deciding the civil review on merit and it is accordingly disposed of with an observation that the period of blacklisting which will come to end on 31st of March, 2026 will not come in the way or work to the detriment of the petitioner in participating in any fresh tender, in future, if otherwise, the petitioner is found eligible. 12. The petition is accordingly disposed of. vinayak/- (Rajiv Roy, J) ( Alok Kumar Sinha, J) U