2026:JHHC:19172-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.6164 of 2025 ----- M/s. Guljarilal Mahto, through its proprietor Guljarilal Mahto, son of Indradeo Mahto, resident of Village & P.O.- Kurwa, P.S. Dumka Mufassil, District-Dumka. .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Energy, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi. 2. The Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. through its Managing Director, having its office at Engineering Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 3. The General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Electric Supply Area, Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., P.O., P.S. & District-Dumka. .......... Respondents. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate For the Res. No.1 : Mrs. Niharika Mazumdar, Advocate For the Res. Nos.2 & 3: Mr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. S.C. ----- Order No.03 Date: 01.07.2026 1. Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar for the petitioner, Mrs. Niharika Mazumdar, learned A.C. to A.G. for the 1st respondent (State) and Mr. Sachin Kumar for the 2nd and 3rd respondents (contesting respondents). 2. Rule. Rule is made returnable immediately at the request and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. The petitioner challenges communication dated 4th September, 2025 debarring it for a period of one year for participating in any tender for supply of materials or execution of work under any head under Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited. 4. Admittedly, no show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner before passing the impugned debarment order dated 4th September, 2025. 5. It is by now, well settled that a blacklisting or a debarment order must be preceded by a proper show-cause notice having regard to 2026:JHHC:19172-DB 2 the drastic civil consequences that such an order visits the affected party. 6. In support of the above proposition, the reference is usually made to the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Gorkha Security Services vs. Government (NCT of Delhi) and Others, (2014) 9 SCC 105; UMC Technologies Private Limited vs. Food Corporation of India and Another, (2021) 2 SCC 551; and Vetindia Pharmaceuticals Limited vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, (2021) 1 SCC 804. 7. On the above short but crucial ground, we set aside the impugned communication dated 4th September, 2025. This order shall, however, not preclude the respondents from issuing the petitioner a show-cause notice and disposing of the same in accordance with law and on its own merits after complying with principles of natural justice. 8. If any fresh show-cause notice is to be issued, we are sure that the respondents will take into consideration the fact that the impugned order dated 4th September, 2025, though issued in breach of principles of natural justice and fair play, has operated till date. Otherwise, all contentions of all parties are left open. 9. The Rule is made absolute in the above terms. 10. This petition is allowed without any order for costs. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 1st July, 2026 Sanjay/Rohit Uploaded on 02.07.2026